Top Law Schools

Employment wise, should Gtown even be compared to the other T14s? It lags pretty far behind the rest of the schools for BigLaw + Fed clerkships. Are these figures misleading or is Gtown really closer to some of the T20/30 schools like Vandy, BC, and UCLA?

Edit: I say this as someone who loves Gtown and has always wanted to go there. Just a bit concerned about the employment numbers vs other options

Employment wise GULC is obviously a step below the rest of the top schools. I think people generally tend to be 'okay' keeping it in that top tier because of its national reach. That's where the difference between 14 and 15-17 is it seems. Those other 3 place as well, maybe even better, but they place into a specific market.

This has never been discussed on this site before. Thank you for pointing it out and igniting what is sure to be a productive (and certainly not repetitive) conversation.

That's the same conclusion I came to, and I didn't bother applying as a result. GULC has less than 45% biglaw + federal clerkship, whereas the rest of the T14 is somewhere between 60-75%.

What I've heard is that Georgetown is just as good as the rest of T14 only if you're above median. That turned me off because the biggest draw of the T14 for me was the availability of "top" outcomes. Being a median student at GULC means you're really on the edge of biglaw placement, whereas being median at a place like UVA (which has 70% biglaw + federal clerkship) means you're pretty comfortably getting a biglaw spot.

I don't think it's a bad school but I would rather take a regional school (UT, UCLA, Vandy) at lower cost than pay for T14 prestige that doesn't translate into employment outcomes.

lymenheimer wrote:This has never been discussed on this site before. Thank you for pointing it out and igniting what is sure to be a productive (and certainly not repetitive) conversation.

^

OP: "A thing ranked below other things is not as good as those higher ranked things!"

The one thing to keep in mind though, after you exit the T14 and go down the list, is that in order to have good prospects at biglaw/fed you need to be higher up in the class. Every year, 50% of the students fall at or below median. The main reason I kept GTown on my list is because even if you're slightly below median, you can network your way into biglaw or at least into decent job prospects, which might not be an option at regional schools.

These debates seem a little funny to me now that I have been practicing for awhile.

The real problem with GULC is that it has too many students and takes on too many transfers. Come interview time there are only so many slots and so many callbacks. Most firms are not going to give GULC twice as many callbacks because it has twice as many students. This is why being a median student at GULC is so dangerous.

Sorry, I realize this discussion has been talked about throughout TLS. I probably didn't write out my question as clearly as possible. Basically, I'm wondering if Gtown's numbers are misleading, or if there really is a 30% difference in biglaw outcomes between Gtown and Duke

RParadela wrote:Sorry, I realize this discussion has been talked about throughout TLS. I probably didn't write out my question as clearly as possible. Basically, I'm wondering if Gtown's numbers are misleading, or if there really is a 30% difference in biglaw outcomes between Gtown and Duke

Again...your question is novel to these prestigious fora...

Yeah, please stop with these Gtown threads. There are so many I don't think you need to even use the search function, they're probably on this first page.

If you are actually deciding between Duke and Gtown, give us COA for both, career goals, etc., then that would be useful to us and you.

*insert random comment about UT here*

Based on anecdotal evidence from people I know personally who went to GULC, they had no problems securing big law jobs after graduation. I can't speak to their performance during law school, but I assume they worked hard because hey knew coming in that law school in general would be rigorous. What keeps GULC in the T14, from my observations, is the national reach of the school based on its reputation and its large alumni network, the latter of which shouldn't be overlooked. Georgetown is no Harvard and I'm not saying there aren't better options out there, but I feel like it doesn't get enough credit on forums such as these.

UVAIce wrote:These debates seem a little funny to me now that I have been practicing for awhile.

The real problem with GULC is that it has too many students and takes on too many transfers. Come interview time there are only so many slots and so many callbacks. Most firms are not going to give GULC twice as many callbacks because it has twice as many students. This is why being a median student at GULC is so dangerous.

Seems like despite the hilarity you've correctly identified the concern.

OP the problem with Georgetown is that we don't really know the problem. If a ton of GULC people are shooting for gov/PI, then it's no biggie and they place fine. It just sucks to bet so much on that.

With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

Misread the report. I still don't understand the criticism. I think many of these reports are misleading when you break down the stats

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

Misread the report. I still don't understand the criticism. I think many of these reports are misleading when you break down the stats

You're right. FAKE NEWS!

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

Misread the report. I still don't understand the criticism. I think many of these reports are misleading when you break down the stats

You're right. FAKE NEWS!

I didn't mean it that way, but ok.

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

Misread the report. I still don't understand the criticism. I think many of these reports are misleading when you break down the stats

You're right. FAKE NEWS!

I didn't mean it that way, but ok.

Well, how did you mean it?

The reports are fairly detailed, and there's no reason for a school to under-report their employment numbers. So why do you think that it's misleading?

cavalier1138 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:

mathis1490 wrote:

PrezRand wrote:With a 90% employment and only 2% of the students getting small-law, I really do not understand any criticism of GT besides the cost

67.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/gulc/jobs/

Misread the report. I still don't understand the criticism. I think many of these reports are misleading when you break down the stats

You're right. FAKE NEWS!

I didn't mean it that way, but ok.

Well, how did you mean it?

The reports are fairly detailed, and there's no reason for a school to under-report their employment numbers. So why do you think that it's misleading?

Could it be possible that since GT appears to be PI focused and might focus on PI in DC, that the jobs are short-term jobs and the students will be seeking another job in the future? Is it possible for the job market in DC for PI to be slacking? Idk. I just feel like there are a variety of other factors that might affect the statistics since GT still has a very small percentage of students that get small law and people on this forum usually conclude that if you do not get big law, you will end up in a small firm

PrezRand wrote: Could it be possible that since GT appears to be PI focused and might focus on PI in DC, that the jobs are short-term jobs and the students will be seeking another job in the futue?

I'm sure that's possible, but NYU is extremely PI-focused without having any of those issues. So is Berkeley. It's not like LST doesn't count PI numbers in their assessment.

The question is why Georgetown grads aren't getting offered long-term employment, and as far as I know, there's nothing particularly special about DC public interest that necessitates short-term employment for recent graduates.

PrezRand wrote: Could it be possible that since GT appears to be PI focused and might focus on PI in DC, that the jobs are short-term jobs and the students will be seeking another job in the future? Is it possible for the job market in DC for PI to be slacking? Idk. I just feel like there are a variety of other factors that might affect the statistics since GT still has a very small percentage of students that get small law and people on this forum usually conclude that if you do not get big law, you will end up in a small firm

99/678 grads were being paid by the school ten months after graduation. Once that money runs out maybe a lot do end up at a small firm.

cavalier1138 wrote:

PrezRand wrote: Could it be possible that since GT appears to be PI focused and might focus on PI in DC, that the jobs are short-term jobs and the students will be seeking another job in the futue?

I'm sure that's possible, but NYU is extremely PI-focused without having any of those issues. So is Berkeley. It's not like LST doesn't count PI numbers in their assessment.

The question is why Georgetown grads aren't getting offered long-term employment, and as far as I know, there's nothing particularly special about DC public interest that necessitates short-term employment for recent graduates.

True. I guess I just assumed NYU and Berkeley were PI-focused in NYC and Cali respectively. My bad.