<p>This is hypothetical but which is a better scenario to end up in, assuming no scholarships? Comparing the lower T-14 schools, does it matter significantly if you're top 30% at CCN vs. Duke, Northwestern, Virginia, Georgetown, or Cornell? The reason I ask is I actually prefer some of the latter to CCN in terms of quality of life, cost of living, campus environment, etc. </p>
<p>Also, does it necessarily follow that just because you're at the top of the applicant pool at the lower T-14 schools you will likely get better grades than most students there or that if you have below median application #s at HYS, you will end up in the bottom half of the class?</p>
<p>This is actually one of the worst surveys, not just because of the clerkship problem, but also because this survey includes non-biglaw firms too; the NLJ250 is not entirely biglaw</p>
<p>Yes. Top 30% at CCN is looking at most of the V10, except Wachtell and maybe Sullivan & Cromwell. Top 30% at the latter schools is looking at V25s-V50s, and Georgetown and Cornell students in particular will be looking at the V100.</p>
<p>how about my first question, the one in the title?</p>
<p>Also, what are the differences between V10 vs V25-50 vs V100 firms? Prestige? Do the the higher-ranked ones pay more and pamper their hires more or something?</p>
<p>I don’t think it matters to be “below median” at Yale, or even Stanford. It might be better to be top third at CCN than below median at Harvard, and it might even be better for one at MVP. Probably the same for top third at other T14s, though. I’m speculating, because it’s really tough to conceptualize and articulate the recruiting differences between the ranks at different schools to the extent you demand, and because there are other non-quantitative variables that play a significant role.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1) Prestige (whatever that is)
2) Exit Options
3) Partnership prospects (they, usually, diminish as prestige increases)
4) Type of work
5) Type of clients
6) Job security (usually)</p>
<p>Usually, the higher ranked ones pay the same as the lower ranked ones (the obvious exception is places like Wachtell, and other places that have profit-sharing initiatives with their associates, like Boies and (I think) Kramer Levin). It really varies by firm. Some firms prefer to follow the market, and others prefer to shatter it. I like to think that, the higher ranked the firm, the higher the chance you’ll get to keep making what your peers at lower ranked firms are making.</p>
<p>If top 30% at CCN aren’t competitive for Wachtell & Sullivan, then what is? Is it possible to be at the “top 30%” of HYS, since they have pass-fail grading schemes? I am confused!</p>
<p>Wow so people can take satisfaction in the fact that if they’re borderline for Harvard and don’t get in, they can try to be in the top 1/3 of whatever T14 they end up enrolling in and possibly be better off than a significant chunk of Harvard students in terms of biglaw prospects?</p>
<p>But then again, they could have gotten into HLS and been in the upper half of class also. As you know, HLS rarely admits students whose LSAT/GPA combo fall below the median (meaning if one of their numbers is below median, their other # would have to be above for H to take them). Sure, they will have more students with great #s to compete against but that’s not to say they won’t have a competitive chance of ending up in the upper half of class-- albeit it’s more of a risk than if they had enrolled in a lower-ranked school where their #s would place them at the top.</p>
<p>Job security is definitely huge esp. in this economy and some might enjoy the greater prestige, but some might actually prefer the higher chances of making partner at a lower-ranked firm. Many might also not care as much about differences in the type of work and clients they get.</p>
<p>It’s hard to bank on being in the top 1/3, and it’s not “whatever T14.” It’s just CCN.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you’re at a prestigious firm, odds are you can lateral to that same lower-ranked firm and have the same chance of making partner. Or, depending on seniority at the former firm, one can lateral into partnership at the latter. I don’t see myself as having diminished my overall partnership prospects because I chose to work at a V5. My chances of making partner at the V5 are slim, sure. But my chances of making partner at any firm? Probably the same if not slightly better than the dude who starts at the less prestigious firm.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You asked for differences, and I gave them. Whether or not people care as much about them is irrelevant.</p>
<p>Yeah, regardless of #s, I realize LS grades can be unpredictable and it’s hard to count on being at the top regardless of how hard you work.</p>
<p>I didn’t think about the possibility of transferring from more prestigious to less prestigious firms just for the sake of having better chances of making partner down the road.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, I know. Just saying that besides greater job security (by how much, I don’t know) and greater leverage in making partner at a firm, working at an ultra-elite firm doesn’t have as many advantages over less prestigious firms than I thought (though the aforementioned advantages are definitely important).</p>
Probably the same for top third at other T14s in terms of what? You could interpret this as that it’s better to be top third at CCN than being bottom half at Harvard AND it’s better to be in the top third at the lower T14s than to be bottom half at Harvard. OR it’s better to be top third at CCN than to be top third at lower T14s. I’m guessing you mean the latter as you implied in your previous post. </p>
<p>Also, you’re saying it might be better to be top third at MVP than bottom half at Harvard?</p>
<p>You do realize that many of the T-14 schools do not rank. HYS doesn’t really have grades so how will you determine where someone is ranked? People can and do speculate where they are but at some schools there are no official rankings.</p>
<p>Law firms have a rough idea of where students rank at any T14. Even as a student, it’s not hard to get an estimate of where you stand, especially since most T14s publish their mean, median, 3L honors cutuffs, and 3L rank for clerkship purposes.</p>
<p>Is it true that Chicago’s grading system makes law school unnecessarily stressful, or is that not the case since you can find out your rank at other schools anyway even though they don’t have official rankings?</p>
<p>A UofC student can correct me if I’m wrong.</p>
<p>a) I don’t believe UofC ranks is students.
b) The grading system there is specifically designed so that grade-intensive employers and judges can make meaningful distinctions between candidates. This is especially important for the latter. Often, when a school is a top school, but uses a grade to represent the top 10% of a class, that grade tends to obscure where in the 10% that student falls. The grading system at UofC allows judges to know when one is clearly superior to the other, unlike other systems where both students would receive an H or an A or something. This problem is largely irrelevent for Yale, I think. Probably a little significant for Harvard and Stanford. I definitely think Berkeley screws its students over every year with its system.</p>
<p>Where an employer will care significantly about grades, unless you’re at a school where that employer will take you virtually from anywhere in the class, I think it’s always better to go to the school where meaningful grade distinctions are made. That’s my opinion, though.</p>
<p>“I don’t see myself as having diminished my overall partnership prospects because I chose to work at a V5. My chances of making partner at the V5 are slim, sure. But my chances of making partner at any firm? Probably the same if not slightly better than the dude who starts at the less prestigious firm.”</p>
<p>I strongly, strongly disagree with this. I have never seen any support for the idea that the Cravath lateral to the V50 firm has a better chance of making partner there than the associate who’s been with the V50 firm from the beginning. Just the opposite is true in my experience.</p>
<p>You know, I wonder if law schools have ever contemplated a pass/fail “public” system for employers, and then releasing grades only to judges for clerkship purposes.</p>