The second coming of the WUSTL employment apocalypse
| tripping appetizing spot | 07/23/13 | | demanding stain | 07/23/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/23/13 | | deranged self-centered indian lodge | 07/23/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/23/13 | | up-to-no-good cruel-hearted immigrant property | 07/23/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/23/13 | | demanding stain | 07/23/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/23/13 | | demanding stain | 07/23/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/23/13 | | internet-worthy very tactful cruise ship jap | 07/24/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/24/13 | | Stubborn principal's office international law enforcement agency | 07/24/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/24/13 | | internet-worthy very tactful cruise ship jap | 07/24/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/24/13 | | internet-worthy very tactful cruise ship jap | 07/24/13 | | Contagious insane cuckold dragon | 07/24/13 | | odious frum business firm | 07/24/13 | | exciting area psychic | 07/26/13 | | Lilac stimulating senate | 07/26/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/24/13 | | Lilac stimulating senate | 07/26/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/24/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/23/13 | | aphrodisiac turquoise site | 07/23/13 | | up-to-no-good cruel-hearted immigrant property | 07/23/13 | | demanding stain | 07/23/13 | | up-to-no-good cruel-hearted immigrant property | 07/24/13 | | Cerebral Office Tank | 07/24/13 | | Violet Irradiated Sweet Tailpipe Dilemma | 07/23/13 | | insecure weed whacker | 07/23/13 | | Kink-friendly Bawdyhouse | 07/23/13 | | Violet Irradiated Sweet Tailpipe Dilemma | 07/23/13 | | gay shivering antidepressant drug | 07/24/13 | | Lilac stimulating senate | 07/23/13 | | doobsian lettuce parlour | 07/23/13 | | Lilac stimulating senate | 07/23/13 | | up-to-no-good cruel-hearted immigrant property | 07/24/13 | | excitant massive roast beef | 08/30/14 | | demanding stain | 07/24/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/24/13 | | Cream tantric brunch becky | 07/24/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/26/13 | | Alcoholic histrionic people who are hurt sound barrier | 07/26/13 | | Canary quadroon theater stage | 07/26/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/26/13 | | Canary quadroon theater stage | 07/26/13 | | Lilac stimulating senate | 07/26/13 | | demanding stain | 07/26/13 | | adventurous sanctuary | 07/26/13 | | tripping appetizing spot | 07/26/13 | | Vigorous famous landscape painting | 07/26/13 | | Concupiscible nighttime menage mexican | 08/30/14 | | Soggy Background Story | 08/30/14 | | Concupiscible nighttime menage mexican | 08/30/14 | | unhinged racy boistinker idea he suggested | 02/23/15 | | curious digit ratio | 02/24/15 | | mauve forum | 10/09/16 | | spruce state turdskin | 07/29/19 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 23rd, 2013 7:27 PM Author: tripping appetizing spot
It's like hogs to the slaughter each year.
---
>So for WashU folk, looks like selections were made, and looks like I struck out. Is it really possible not to get a single interview with meh/okay grades(87-90ish), even with ironclad ties, and the top bids on a specific secondary market I know not many people have ties to? I thought there was at least a lotto.
>I had a 91.5 with LR at OCI 2 years ago. I got about a dozen interviews, but I was competing against all the top 5% kids as well. This was for the random mid west markets as well, WUSTL doesn't limit bids in an effective way, everyone usually bids on everything. If you're an average white guy with no work experience or brand name undergrad, they probably will pass you over.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=212292&start=25#p6958406
>Is it true that CSO got rid of the oci lottery this year? Someone in the Midwest oci thread had grades 87-90 that didn't get a single interview? At least in the past CSO picked 6/20 slots.
>Maybe that person didn't bid everywhere or only for that market (I would guess KC or something like that) or there was a flaw with the resume he uploaded or something? Also they came out rolling so maybe he checked too early? Seems odd to say the least
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=130775&start=3000#p6958984
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2319168&forum_id=2#23705712)
|
|
Date: July 24th, 2013 10:13 PM Author: tripping appetizing spot
Unless UVA is outright lying, most of the jobs they're supporting are "legit." They have overwhelmingly high placement into FTLT employment. They also have relatively high school funding of those FTLT positions. But if you're employed at, say, a law firm of around 20 people who say that they can't pay for your full salary yet, or can only pay for a portion of the salary, or who only accept you by a certain start date because they can't pay you until later and expect you to still work (unless you'd like that delayed start date), then the law school funding the position is quite useful.
Of course, if UVA is outright lying that the positions are not "long term" (i.e., expected to last for one year or more), then, of course, we can't rely on the data.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2319168&forum_id=2#23713770) |
Date: July 23rd, 2013 7:47 PM Author: Violet Irradiated Sweet Tailpipe Dilemma
I know of a guy who graduated from WashU with great grades and got a NLJ 250 job. Very high class rank, so it was kind of sad to see him at a non V50 type firm. Very social, cool dude.
Funny thing was that his entire life he was not very credentialed academically and just did well enough on the LSAT to get him to WashU. I guess he turned it the fuck on 1L year.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2319168&forum_id=2#23705848) |
Date: July 24th, 2013 9:43 PM Author: Cream tantric brunch becky
I had seriously never heard of this dump until I looked at usnwr the year I was applying. I'm still not sure it actually exists.
WTF IS A WUSTL?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2319168&forum_id=2#23713571) |
|
Date: July 26th, 2013 12:13 PM Author: tripping appetizing spot
You'll need a little context for the delusion going on in this exchange. NLJ250 reports 16% WUSTL placement. So then comes:
>In all fairness, the actual chance is probably a bit higher than this (closer to 20-25%) since 1. it doesn't include clerks, many of whom already have biglaw lined up, and 2. I'm sure that at least some people who have could have gone biglaw (or even who had an offer) chose to go somewhere else (non-nlj 250 firms and boutiques, pi, government, etc.)
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=198546&start=9900#p6958654
[This is, of course, the sort of "self-selection" myth that many buy. And WUSTL has one of the worst clerkship track records in North America, see http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=1304980&forum_id=2 ]
>We probably lose 5% a year from transferring that would have gotten biglaw - We've had at least 4 people that I know of transfer out that will get biglaw. Of the ~196 we had at the start, say we lose ~6 that will get biglaw to transfers, and then we bring in 60 people from TTTT's as transfers that won't get biglaw. We'll have a class of 250 when we graduate. Considering the last class we have statistics on did ~ 27% firms 100+ or federal clerkships, and probably 20% of that class transferred in and probably the same handful of biglaw secure people transferred out, I'd say that our odds are definitely higher than 16%.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=198546&start=9900#p6958924
[Note, first, that we've moved from 16% to "20-25%" to "27%" and more. Note the double-counting logical fallacies. First, he says that the 6 they lose to transfers would have gotten BIGLAW at WUSTL regardless, which is doubtful at best; but then he assumes that if they did get BIGLAW, they would not have taken slots from those who still remained at WUSTL. Second, he says that none of the 60 incoming transfers get BIGLAW, which is also assuredly a false assumption. But that allows him to make the denominator solely students who completed 1L year at WUSTL rather than WUSTL graduates overall.]
>I was a little thrown by that too at first. NLJ 250 used to be the "go to" number for biglaw chances a few years ago, but I think the number most people use on TLS as a proxy for biglaw these days is LST's firms of 100+ combined with clerkships. So it's about 26% vs. 42%, based on the c/o 2012 numbers. I'll be very interested to see what my class (2013) looks like, and then 2014. I'm a little nervous about our class since its so big, but I think 2014 and beyond will look pretty solid. The smaller class sizes will help, and I've been hearing that last fall's OCI was a lot better than our OCI.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=198546&start=9900#p6960550
[Here, Romo the Loser insists that the number is 26%, not 16%, and that in the previous year it was 42%, further inflating WUSTL's employment prospects and conflating a previous year's TLS-related metric (42) with the current year's NLJ250 metric (16). And yet, he's still "nervous"? WHY BE NERVOUS!]
>I wonder if they'll start reporting people at NLJ 350 now. That is all of the biggest firms down to 112 attorneys, so not too far off the 100+ measure. NLJ 250 goes down to 160.
>Even for what it purports to do, NLJ250 is not very reliable. There are entire firms inexplicably absent (including NYC firms with 50-100 SAs), and some of the firms that are represented are inaccurately reported (per people from those firms). There was quite a bit of discussion about it in the NLJ 250 thread from last year, and folks were really surprised at how bad the data was.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=198546&start=9900#p6962244
[Here, Romo the Loser and another begin to UNSKEW THE NLJ. First, the NLJ sample size is too small: even though the next 100 NLJ firms are, by definition, dramatically smaller and hire dramatically fewer associates than the NLJ250, the insist that it must be materially different. Second, Romo alleges that the data is bad, see TLS DATA MASTERMEN who've exposed the NLJ for the fraud that it must be.]
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2319168&forum_id=2#23724529) |
|
|