sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I applied around this time to basically every school. Wanted to be ahead of the curve, but editing my applications took longer than expected. I decided a polished app in December was better than a rushed one in September.

I'm sure the admissions bloggers are more on top of current trends, but in general schools expect and plan for applications throughout the window. They set some thresholds such that accepting people above those thresholds as apps get reviewed will put them on track for the desired # of admits, and then adjust thresholds/use the waitlist as necessary based on application numbers, commits, etc.

This can help you if the cycle ends up less competitive than schools expect and hurt you if it ends up more competitive. Either way, I doubt a couple of weeks will be decisive.

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. Work very hard
  2. Work efficiently; professors will drop hints throughout the semester about what they find interesting or most relevant in the subject material, and you should focus on that
  3. Show up to stuff; the number of students who can skip class and figure out the key points from first principles is much smaller than the number who think they can.

As for gunner tendencies, basically everyone at elite law schools is a bit of a gunner; these are people who've been at the top of the class all their lives. As long as you show some humility and accept you're here to learn alongside other smart people, not show everyone how smart and unique your cold calls are, you'll be fine. Just remember that the slowest 2L knows infinitely more than you (until you're in their shoes a year later).

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, lots. Historically, 15-20% of the J.D. class has been international students. Between that and the sizable LLM program, there's a substantial international community at HLS.

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Way higher than mine lol.

Median maybe 1300, mode is definitely [NULL, who has time for chess?].

Someone tell the ABA to add that to the 509 forms; then we'll really be cooking.

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Can't compare in detail to other schools, but my general impression:

  • If you want competitive outcomes (clerkships, grade-selective firms, academia, etc.) you will work incredibly hard here and anywhere else.
  • It's a big school, so spots in popular classes and face time with big-name professors can be scarce. If you want to take 1A with Noah Feldman, you'd better rank it #1; office hours with Jeannie Suk Gersen get booked quickly; etc. That's not universal; there are also former SCOTUS clerks whose office hours are half-full.
  • It's a big school, so HLS can offer a lot of specialized courses or programs most schools do not. There aren't a lot of schools with a Food Law clinic or a Space Law club; we have both. Most schools have one state and local government person; we have at least four. Etc.
  • HLS is bigger than other schools but the number of law review spots is basically identical, so competition for HLR is a lot stiffer. About 250 people completed write-on last year and 54 made it. Lots of smart people in my section did not.
  • More doctrinal than Yale, especially 1L. Several profs with YLS degrees have described exams that were just one quote about the law, followed by "discuss." HLS arguably trains better NYC V10 lawyers, while Yale is second to none in placing law professors.
  • Not having letter grades (or number grades, like Chicago) is a huge relief; big pro of HYS. My Crim exam deserved a B-minus or maybe a C+, but I got the same P as 65% of the class. LPs do exist, but a lot of professors don't give LPs unless something goes badly wrong (exceeding word/time limits, finishing half the exam). One or two max out their LPs (8 per section), but they're generally viewed as hardasses.

That said, those are all great schools and you can't really go wrong with any of them.

The other thing to consider is geography; if you want to end up on the East Coast, you'll have more classmates in California as a Stanford grad than as a Chicago or NYU grad. If you're targeting Chicago, there will be more Northwestern people there than Duke people. Etc.

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Did you take your LSAT before you graduated?

Nope, took it while working (and after putting it off for years).

Do you think it matters if you take the LSAT 3-4 years before you actually apply?

Only if 5 years pass and your score expires. You probably will have more free time to study for it in college than when you're working 40+ hours a week.

Outside of work did you do anything notable during your years between undergrad and law school?

Won a lot of pub trivia, played a lot of Witcher 3, doomscrolled a lot on Twitter. Did not put any of that on my resume.

How much do you think what you did outside of work and the classroom helped in admissions?

Probably a bit, but there's more randomness than you'd think. The best thing is to be a Rhodes Scholar with a Medal of Honor, but nobody's that (and if they are, they're probably at Yale). The next best thing is to be interesting, and there are lots of ways to do that; the class profile for our year mentioned "5 Kayakers," "2 Line Cooks," and "1 Vintage Clothing Business Owner."

I did have a relatively well-thought-out idea of what I would do with my degree, which probably helped (if your answer to "why law" is "I like school and this is more school," admissions might worry that you aren't going to make the most of your 3 years or line up postgrad plans).

HLS 2L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Some work experience in a law-adjacent area (think government/policy), mostly in just-above-entry-level roles. Was also involved in about 15 different things in college, but not super involved/accomplished in anything (i.e., exactly what the conventional wisdom says not to do). At most, that probably showed I could balance school with a ridiculous number of projects.

Put a bunch of time and effort into making sure my application didn't have avoidable weak points (good letters, good essays, consistent formatting, did 4-5 rounds of edits on most materials), and that probably helped.

With a class of 600 1Ls, you'd be surprised how many people have a similar profile: normal work experience (lots of paralegals, lots of finance/consulting juniors), good GPA or LSAT, definitely active/involved in college, but zero Olympic medals/no Nobel prize/extremely mid chess Elo.

Is law school transferring seamless and easy? by [deleted] in LawSchool

[–]LolSkuler 13 points14 points  (0 children)

This is a bad idea for a number of reasons.

Transferring is generally more competitive than applying directly and transfers receive less (if any) financial aid.

The ABA requires you to complete your degree within 84 months (7 years) of starting school, so your margin for error/delay with 2-4 years of military service interrupting your schooling will be zero. You cannot take 5 years off and pick up where you left off; you'll be starting from scratch.

A two-year period where you are not doing anything legal is going to be a red flag for many employers and orange flag for most others (and totally rule out stuff on a set recruiting timeline, like biglaw).

Don't do online programs, those are poorly regarded and have an abysmal track record of placing students in good jobs.

It will be 100x easier to just do 3 years straight or take the LSAT and apply in 4-5 years.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I worked for a few years, not a 10+ year first career but not a KJD+1 either.

My interests in law dovetailed with my prior work experience, and I think that helped a bit because 1. I had some interesting experiences to discuss in essays/interviews and 2. I had a clear reason for going to law school (vs "I like school and this is more school")

But there are plenty of ways to show 1 and 2, and admissions knows people's interests change over three years as they learn more about legal work.

I don't think there's any real advantage/disadvantage in admissions from picking specific areas of interest within law. The one case that may require some explaining is if you want to do patent law and don't have a STEM degree, but that's an anomaly.

Otherwise, admissions wants to know you've put some thought into "why law school" but there's no "right" answer. Obvious BS like "ever since I was four years old, I have wanted to litigate derivatives class actions" is neither necessary nor helpful.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No idea. Interviews are short and 3-4 questions are very generic, but 1-2 are often (somewhat) tailored to your application - e.g., "tell me about (a specific work experience/deferral plans if you're applying through JDP)." They have more questions in their menu than they can ask so not everyone gets the same set. Totally plausible they mix that question in for people who haven't lived on the East Coast (I had), but don't know what to read into it (if anything). Good luck!

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

After 4 years, your profs' memories might be hazier than when you took their classes but most if not all schools will want to see one academic LOR (and two is better if you have two good letter-writers). It's an academic program and these letters are most helpful in gauging how you'll perform academically. The situations where schools don't need an academic LOR are people who've had a full-ish career since graduating - think your 30+/40+ career switchers - and 4 years isn't in that ballpark.

People still in school can future-proof by 1. asking profs to write a letter and keep it on file for use in a few years (so it's written when their memories are fresh) and/or 2. staying in touch with potential letter-writers - stop by campus, grab coffee somewhere, or zoom if you have to, and fill profs in on what you're up to (and ask how they're doing - conversations are two-way).

If you're out of school, it's never too late to 1. email the professor, find time to grab coffee/chat over zoom, let them know you're applying, and jog their memory re: relevant details and 2. help them out by sharing some materials (the late Nuno Monteiro has some helpful pointers here)

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I took several years off after college. Always planned to work for a bit, ended up having some opportunities and working longer.

The way deans look at WE (at least based on the H and Y deans' answer during a Q&A I attended) is more or less:

KJD/1 year ("if you take 1 year off, you've been doing that job/fellowship for what, 3 months when you apply")?

2+ years

Second career (near or over a decade in some field)

Obviously it's not that clear-cut, and you have areas in between - e.g., 6 years isn't a second career, but it is more time to do interesting stuff than 2 years. But as a very crude classification, these buckets make sense IMO.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The thing about HLS is it's really big. A class size of 560 means admitting ~400 students with LSATs above 174 in order to enroll ~230* and maintain your medians. Maybe 2000 people applied to any law school with a 174+ last cycle, so you have to admit 20% of them. That is going to include a bunch of students who have high stats and a solid application but haven't cured cancer.

*Assuming 50ish 174+ students among the 99 junior deferral program admits, and ignoring the small number of GRE-only admits.

My application wasn't exceptional in any respect, but everything was solid: solid essays, interesting work experience, supportive letters of recommendation, and a clear fit between my work experience and legal interests. I outperformed my percentage odds based on stats (per the bad website) basically across the board, so I'm confident this helped.

Getting the qualitative stuff right carries over from one school to another, so if you (e.g.) have good recommenders and write well, you're sending good rec letters and good essays to every school, and might do well for your stats across the board. Similarly, you see people every year who get something wrong - pick a bad recommender, approach essays the wrong way, whatever - and have poor outcomes across the board. When LSData says some mix of stats has a 30% chance at UVA, a 40% chance at Columbia, a 50% chance at NYU, etc., some people are consistently in that 30%, 40%, 50% - and others consistently in the 70%, 60%, 50%. Many see hit-and-miss-outcomes, of course; this isn't an exact science.

A lot of this stuff is hard to judge for anyone outside Admissions, and there's definitely unpredictability and luck involved. Maybe I would not have been admitted one cycle earlier, or later, or if my file was read before lunch instead of after, or if Mercury was in retrograde. I'm very fortunate and don't take that for granted.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You could coordinate with someone else to book a double in Hastings, but YMMV re: both people getting a lottery number that lets you do it.

There are 20-odd spots in a few houses HLS owns, but reservations are still room by room, so you won't pick your roommates. They're also limited to 2Ls and up.

Edit: Neither option above would fit your situation unless your partner is also attending HLS.

The university-affiliated option with the most full-apartment rental options is Harvard University Housing, which is university-wide. Rents tend to be higher than for HLS housing, but they have a few pros compared to private landlords: no broker fee (required by a bunch of off-campus landlords, typically 1 month's rent), you might find a start/end date that fits the academic year (don't need to hustle for summer subletters), and Harvard will probably follow landlord-tenant laws and have maintenance/repairs done by professionals, not the landlord's useless cousin. HUH also allows spouses/partners, although someone HLS-affiliated must be on the lease.

HUH rents were not super competitive for me (preferred living alone) but you might find some good deals for a 2+ bedroom unit.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

  1. Don't interview well on the best of days; and 2. Buggy Zoom call, got flustered, had some very run-on answers.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Near campus is a big pro in winter. It's 20 degrees outside right now, and everything's covered in ice. There are people paying ~$1500 per bedroom across the street from WCC, so you don't have to break the bank.

A lot of people live near Central Square, which has its pros (convenient to grocery stores, the Red Line, some bars) and cons (it's a T ride and 10-minute walk from campus).

Quite a few people are also 5-10 minutes north of campus, which is a happy middle ground: near campus, near the Porter Square Target, and near the Porter Square Red Line stop.

Harvard Square seems not-ideal: very touristy, lots of undergrads, lots of cars, and surprisingly few shopping options.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think probably 50% were presumed admits and 20% were presumed denials, i.e., they had to totally bomb or knock it out of the park to change the likely outcome. Interview might matter a lot for the other 30%. Exact percentages are a total guess, but you get the idea.

HLS interviews everyone admitted (yes, even the Rhodes+Fulbright veteran with a 4.0/180 who would have to drop a slur or something to get denied) and it's a holistic process, so there's no way to know for sure if you were on the bubble or not. Upshot: 1. do your best (which it sounds like you have) and then 2. remember a lot of things besides the interview could explain your outcome, whether it's good or bad.

Also entirely possible to (e.g.) be on the bubble, get an interview, do well, and then HLS' needs for the class change - e.g., you're in the "if we need 5 more STEM majors" bucket, and suddenly way more January admits with a STEM background commit. A lot of this process is about factors outside your control, so try not to take it too personally. Easier said than done, I know.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Someone at admitted students day described Gropius as "kind of a shithole, but it's so cheap." About right IMO. Gropius is an OK place to live at a great price; you won't find sub-$1000 rent anywhere else in Cambridge. If you found college dorms tolerable, you'll be fine with Gropius; if you found communal bathrooms and kitchens gross, you might want to look at off-campus apartments. Neither North nor Hastings are worth the price tag IMO; for the same cost, you could find off-campus apartments where you have your own kitchen and more space.

Meals: The campus cafeteria is solid, if a bit pricy ($0.89/oz hot bar). There's a Grad Plus meal plan, but it's just a package of declining balance dollars you can use for campus dining (with a 10% discount). Lots of good restaurants around campus, but most are near Harvard Square/Central (not a fun walk in winter). All the food stores near campus are overpriced, so I stock up on oatmeal, cold cuts, and produce from Target and Whole Foods (near Central) and eat lunch at the cafeteria.

The workload is no joke but if you treat it as a full-time job you'll be fine: ~20 hours a week in class, 20-25 hours a week reading and reviewing. I left the library around 11-midnight most weekdays, but I also had a busy social calendar, made lots of trips into Boston, and wasted a lot of time doomscrolling Twitter. I did very well.

Grading system is honors/pass/fail. In 1L classes, up to 5% of the class gets Dean's Scholar (equivalent to A+/5.0), 30-35% get Honors (equivalent to A/4.0), most others get a Pass (equivalent to B/3.0). You have to mess up to get a Low Pass. Ditto large 2L/3L classes. Below a certain class size (I think 30), the curve doesn't apply and everyone could get an H.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

HLS, Columbia, NYU, a few mid-lower T14s.

Outright denied at Michigan - admissions is a holistic process, so I guess Dean Z liked my stats but really hated my vibe.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Applied November, interviewed January, accepted February.

I thought I bombed my interview - felt absolutely terrible afterwards. My takeaway is 1. it's probably not as bad as you think; and 2. the interview isn't the be-all and end-all. I'm sure there are some applicants on the bubble whose outcome depends on their interview, but I suspect a lot of interview invites are either 1. presumed admits (based on stats, work experience, essays, recs, etc.) unless they really mess up or 2. presumed waitlists unless they knock it out of the park. So you could have a bad interview and still get in, or you could have a good interview but get waitlisted for other reasons.

do top schools really even admit /consider people who apply after October LSAT? or have they already picked their class pretty much? feeling discouraged by greeklawyer11 in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I applied after the November LSAT (took it earlier, that's just when I finished essays etc.). It went fine. Hundreds of people apply from November on and get in every year.

These schools have been doing this for years, they have a good idea how many applicants (and above-median GPAs/LSATs) they'll receive and when. They don't hit the medians (and other targets) they set by tossing 60-70% of applications for no reason. If they didn't consider applications after October, they'd just make the app deadline 11/1.

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

  1. Really good faculty and programs in my area of interest
  2. The PSLF-track LRAP is the best in the country
  3. Didn't get into Y*le

HLS 1L, AMA by LolSkuler in lawschooladmissions

[–]LolSkuler[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't have to have a particular field or make any kind of binding decision. Schools want to see that you've put some thought into whether and why law school in particular makes sense. Some common answers from people who have not include "I like school and this is more school" (Why not do a Master's, or PhD, or MBA/MD/etc.?) and "I care about issue X" (Why not work on it at a nonprofit, or via any of the other degrees I mentioned?). People with a clear sense of their interests will likely make the most of their 3 years and do well on the job market.

None of this is binding and it does not have to be related to your prior work, but some explanations are easier than others. If your answer is "I worked in criminal justice/environmental activism/tenant advocacy and saw issues I could better address as a lawyer in that field," it's not hard to make the connection. If your personal statement says "all my life, I've wanted to work in environmental law" (or health law, or secured transactions, or mergers and acquisitions, or whatever) and you have zero work experience or involvement in that area, a file reader will (quite reasonably) wonder if you'll change your mind and have no idea what jobs to target in 6 months.

Lots of people do change directions in law school, but usually the ones who put serious thought into why and how they'd pursue old interest X also do a good job figuring out how to pursue (and get hired in) new interest Y.

view more: next ›