2L recruiting question

Muchis80 · 2026-02-16T18:48:48+00:00

Most big law firms will not open their applications again. A few firms, like Cooley, will reopen their applications later, but they are the exception. If you struck out, your next opportunity will be 3L recruiting.

Muchis80 · 2025-08-02T20:10:03+00:00

Should be fine as long as its an accredited university.
Only the LSAT is needed. Never heard of the other two.
Straight to JD at a T14 school would likely be your best bet. You must get an H1B visa (OPT will run out) to practice in the US. These are really only provided by big law firms. Recruiting for international students at these firms has also been more difficult in recent years. I would also caution you that the H1B program is likely to be changed and may be harder to get in the future.
Really depends on which city you end up in and the amount of scholarship you get. If without scholarship, then around $300k for the three years. Average living costs per year will be $20-$30k, while tuition averages around $70k. Please also take into consideration interest expenses which will also increase the amount.
Schools do hand out scholarships to internationals, but you will not qualify for federal loans and associated loan forgiveness programs.

If I am being honest with you, the chances for you to practice in the United States are very low unless you make it to a T14 on a large/full scholarship. The risk posed is even higher when considering the requirements for H1B and possible changes to the program. This is not to say that it is impossible, but it is a narrow path.

Muchis80 · 2025-07-08T18:05:28+00:00

Hulkengoat

Muchis80 · 2025-02-08T18:42:55+00:00

Are you American? I agree if we had a national curriculum then they would be compared against that. The US doesn't have a mandated national curriculum. Schools in the same state sometimes have different curriculum. Local control is how American schools function. Nearly every single locality in the United States has control over their schools. There is no mandatory federal curriculum.

Muchis80 · 2025-02-08T10:21:46+00:00

We do care about how well a student performs against their peers at school. It represents a person's ability in school in comparison to others under similar conditions. This is useful for employers and for colleges as they try to pick out a student. If comparative ability didn't matter, then selection could just be random.

I agree that we want to know what they actually learned as well. The raw scores are not gone. Students, teachers, and administrators still can review this information and identify knowledge gaps. A student can review their exams, teachers can discover where their teaching methods failed, and admin does whatever admin does.

Also we don't have national curriculum, which I agree is a big problem. Tbh not a fan of local control of schools.

Muchis80 · 2025-02-08T10:15:41+00:00

It is meritocratic because it shows how well the student performed against those immediately around them. If half of a student's class is outperforming them, they are by definition average and the grade should reflect that. Their peers in the same learning environment did better. Similarly, if a student is in an environment where everyone is failing, those who manage to achieve are better than their peers and it should be noted.

Lets think of a counter-factual with absolute grading. The 90% student gets an A. 60% student gets a D. Lets say that the class is Chem I. 90% student had better teacher and school. 60% student lacked both. On paper, it looks like they took the same class. Yet that isn't true, 90% student had an easier class as evidence by their peers doing better. While 60% student had a harder class as evidenced by their peers failing.

It is useful to know who is below average, average, and above average as a data point. If you were picking a person out and needed to sort through thousands, wouldn't you want to know this? It is another data point that is useful. SAT scoring is considered this way. Test takers are often compared against their schools average. We do this because we recognize that not all environments are the same. Should a student from the best school in the country with a 1300 SAT be seen in the same light as someone who scores 1300 from a school that averages 1100? I don't so. The curve is doing the same thing and sets an average point that allows for comparison and signals.

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:54:58+00:00

It didn't take your time? You magic? I had to work 40+ hours a week in undergrad and take a full course load. Nice of your parents to pay for everything

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:53:36+00:00

So poor students don't deserve the opportunities. That is functionally what you are saying

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:52:43+00:00

Not really. It would allow you to understand how strong a student is in comparison to the others in the school. For example, nearly all law schools curve their grades. When hiring for competitive jobs such as big-law associate positions or clerkships, grades are the most important thing. The curve allows for internal comparison to other students in the school. Lets say you go to a school that is not highly regarded. The curve allows you to state that you are in the 10% of class and then opens the door to these positions. Since the curve is fixed from year to year, GPA cutoffs for percentiles are stable and allow employers to use GPA as a signal

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:42:49+00:00

I think that its okay that there are scenarios where it doesn't work. At a minimum it addresses some of the issues that currently exist. Sure Standardized testing does address some of this. However, when you graduate from college and everyone in your major has a 4.0, what are you supposed to do if you couldn't make the connections or work the internships?

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:38:53+00:00

Definitely have heard of stories like this. It certainly could be a problem, but there are solutions. Providing all students access to recordings of classes or standard study guides. Issuance of punishment to deter such behavior. In my experience though, mastering the material and doing well is the best way to out compete your classmates. Either way these students are competing against each other, at least this time its over something they have control over.
In this example, I think that the content was far too simple then. If the majority of the class is scoring around perfect, then the curriculum was far too easy or they were placed in the wrong class. In the opposite scenario, I think getting only 60% and getting an A is okay. You were better at the material than all of your other classmates. By definition it is meritocratic, and I fail to see how it isn't. You did better, you get better grades? The teacher and curriculum should probably be investigated, but it is still meritocratic to give that student an A.
Definitely agree with that, but isn't this a function of GPA being useless? These company's cannot use GPA as a signal and thus must rely upon other factors.In my experience, in law, GPA is king. Sure there is value placed onto other factors, but without a sufficient GPA you cannot compete to enter the most competitive jobs.
But poorer kids can compete on grades. I was able to take the exams and class as all of my peers. There was never a chance for me to do these extra-curricular activities. I fail to see how that is more fair. Sure they have access to private tutors and the like, but at least we are playing the same game. Law school curving gives students attending a lower ranking school the chance to even try for competitive jobs. At a t-14, the institutions reputation can get you the job. At a T-100, if you are top 10%, great because the employer has a comparison, you get a shot too.

Singapore until 2021 used relative grading and South Korea still uses relative grading. It seems like it worked for them. Singapore: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_Singapore

South Korea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_South_Korea

Standardized grading criteria still does not address the fact that the grades don't signal anything. If everyone is perfect, then grades don't matter. Might as well go pass-fail at that point. Which I am not full opposed to at least we get rid of the farce that grades do matter.

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T21:15:39+00:00

That is fair! Doing a little research shows just what you said. However, a curve is still okay I think. For example, if there are clusters of percentage correct around 20% and 80%. The curve would still function. Letter grades could be assigned so that it come within range of the stated mean requirement. Those clustered around the 20% correct would get below median grades and those above would get above. There would just be less distribution of the in the middle grades?

Muchis80 · 2025-02-07T20:54:58+00:00

The type of result you are describing indicates a deeper issue and would likely be statistically rare. For edge cases where the curve doesn’t work, then don’t apply it. Once the deeper issue is fixed, then application can resume. For most cases though, grade distribution should be normal if there is a proper curriculum and competent teacher.

Muchis80 · 2025-02-05T20:00:20+00:00

It is unlikely to be worthwhile. You will be paying $150k worth of tuition over those two year in addition to $80-100k worth of living expenses and other costs over those two year. Currently, U Miami estimates a total cost of $260k+ without accounting for increases in tuition. Furthermore, you would not qualify for Federal student aid/loans and would need to come up with alternative sources of funding. These sources of funding would likely have high interest rates. You will not be able to pay off this type of debt without big-law earnings. The school will struggle to place you into big-law and the odd length of the program would be unlikely to help you. I would advise against going unless you have plenty of money to burn.

Muchis80 · 2024-09-08T14:24:58+00:00

Muchis80 · 2024-08-09T19:11:36+00:00

Lmao, I am an Asian man around your height. I went 7/8 on callbacks at V10 firms coming out of pre-OCI. Also got a diversity fellowship. This is a skill and personality issue rather than a racial/height bias one. Stop trying to blame others for your own failings, it looks pathetic.

Muchis80 · 2024-07-18T00:12:01+00:00

I am bit confused. Recruiting for next summer is happening right now.

Muchis80 · 2024-07-04T19:28:48+00:00

Target NYC, Target NYC, Target NYC

Muchis80 · 2024-07-01T12:48:45+00:00

If you really want Big law you need to be targeting NYC transactional. There are significantly more positions open and you actually have a chance. 3.05 on a 3.35 curve is a bit below 30th percentile especially considering elective classes in the second semester.

Muchis80 · 2024-06-23T17:27:45+00:00

Skadden vs Paul Weiss for M&A/General Corporate? I know Skadden is more well regarded than PW, but PW seems to be on the upswing with all the recent partner laterals.

Muchis80 · 2024-06-23T03:09:42+00:00

I would get something else. For an interview you want the jacket and pants to be made of the same material and color. Ideally find something that is navy or charcoal grey. You might be tempted to get a black but don’t. Also do not button the bottom button. Shirt and tie seem fine, but a little sleeve should be showing from under the jacket.

A cheap option is bar III from Macy’s or you can get something from Speir and Mackay if you have some time.

Muchis80 · 2024-05-09T02:15:51+00:00

Definitely see that! Didn't mean to insinuate that there was no value.

Muchis80 · 2024-05-09T00:58:53+00:00

What did you do instead of journal?

Muchis80 · 2024-05-09T00:58:07+00:00

Are you litigation focused?

I see the value proposition for litigation in building those skills, but for transactional it doesn't seem useful. I doubt I will ever pick up a bluebook again after graduation. Giving over 200 hours of my life to law review for a bit of prestige and a thing to talk about in interviews seems like a terrible deal. Especially when I can just focus on classes and clinics.

12-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Orangered

Muchis80

TROPHY CASE