Fellow Class of 2013/pre-1L Transfers Forum

[fs_tills]

I'm going in making sure I'd be completely content with graduating from whichever school I choose, BUT if I end up pulling stellar grades, I'll probably try to transfer up. Why not, right?

BUT - this isn't part of my actual law school plan. That's the key.

+1
I'm going for a win-WIN situation at LS. The capital letters (ie - the transfer) would just be bonus.

To OP - give your school a chance you might like it more than whatever school you might transfer to. Don't let TLS give ya that grass-is-greener syndrome...focus on the task at hand.

I will focus on the task at hand. I simply do not want to finish at a school I don't believe yields the best opportunities and connections in my area. If I can transfer up, I will transfer up, no question. There is no money at issue, and judging by current students' take on the school, few lasting friendships or relationships that would be given up should I transfer.

The vast majority of people who know they are willing to commit to three years of law school want to do the best they can. And many of these same people want to graduate and go on to make as much money as they can for their efforts. I will be honest. I'm in this group. A higher ranked school will yield more opportunities for my efforts. Knowing and planning on this, in advance... I personally do not view this as a bad thing. Again, there are personal parts of my situation that make going to law school this year a much more necessary option than waiting it out another year.

That said, I appreciate your and Kiersten1985's level-headed input.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I simply do not want to finish at a school I don't believe yields the best opportunities and connections in my area. If I can transfer up, I will transfer up, no question.

The vast majority of people who know they are willing to commit to three years of law school want to do the best they can. And many of these same people want to graduate and go on to make as much money as they can for their efforts. I will be honest. I'm in this group. A higher ranked school will yield more opportunities for my efforts. Knowing and planning on this, in advance... I personally do not view this as a bad thing. Again, there are personal parts of my situation that make going to law school this year a much more necessary option than waiting it out another year.

That said, I appreciate your and Kiersten1985's level-headed input.

The first paragraph would make me nervous. What if....you do finish at that school? I know you said money is not an issue...but still...

The second paragraph makes a lot of sense...transferring is seems like a good goal when kept in perspective...why not shoot for it? Even if you miss...maybe your extra efforts translate to higher grades???? I can't say I'm not "trying"..."trying" in the same sense that I'm always sorta "trying" to bang a supermodel...(if you don't get the supermodel maybe you get her friend )

[fs_tills]

The first paragraph would make me nervous. What if....you do finish at that school? I know you said money is not an issue...but still...

Well, I guess my "insurance" is that even though it's a lower ranked school, at least it's not a tier 3. Apparently the top firms in the area DO recruit at this school... then again, only for the very top students. So, like you said, any "extra efforts translate to higher grades" should help me, even if I stay instead of transfer. As long as I do well.

Again, I'm not trying for T14. My goal transfer schools are in the late 20s-30s, schools that might not be as well-known or respected outside my region, but within the region carry a much more solid reputation and connected alumni network.

[A'nold]

2 caveats that would make me disagree with all the posters discouraging this:

1. If you wouldn't mind graduating from the school you are attending; and
2. You actually want to be a lawyer more than any other (attainable) career and are not just doing it "for the money."

Going to a school that you hate because you want to make bank after transfering is the horrible idea, not going to a school you like and would be happy with as a backup and will still make you happy upon graduation b/c you will be a lawyer. If 160k is the only thing that will make you happy (or the equivalent big bucks relative to your own happiness) then doing this is a bad idea.

I went in with the idea of transferring but set myself up (at least I hope so) so I would be happy even without transferring.

[Kobe_Teeth]

2 caveats that would make me disagree with all the posters discouraging this:

1. If you wouldn't mind graduating from the school you are attending; and
2. You actually want to be a lawyer more than any other (attainable) career and are not just doing it "for the money."

Going to a school that you hate because you want to make bank after transfering is the horrible idea, not going to a school you like and would be happy with as a backup and will still make you happy upon graduation b/c you will be a lawyer. If 160k is the only thing that will make you happy (or the equivalent big bucks relative to your own happiness) then doing this is a bad idea.

I went in with the idea of transferring but set myself up (at least I hope so) so I would be happy even without transferring.

Like I said...go for the win-WIN!

[flightcontrol]

. . .

[PoliticalJunkie]

I wouldn't mind getting a degree from any of the schools I am seriously considering or working in the market they are in, but the goal at the moment would be to transfer to a T10. If it doesn't happen no biggie, I think i'll be happy where I am.

[chitown825]

Hey OP what kind of school will you be going to?

50-100?
Tier 3?
Tier 4?

How big is the city it's located in? How many other law schools are there?

[engineer]

This is absolutely fucking stupid. Do NOT FOR A SECOND think that you can outsmart the students around you; you are deluded by your own hubris. Guess what, your LSAT and grades are similar to theirs... You just have an inflated ego, and that's what's going to kill you. I entered law school with that mindset and got median'd after my first semester. However, I go to a school at which I'm very happy to be attending; despite hating the area, I realize that the people are wonderful, and I would be fine spending another two years here. But, I really want to be in NYC, so I am busting my ass to make at least a lateral transfer feasible. And you know what? I can do it. I no longer underestimate my classmates, and I am taking this semester as seriously as a fucking brain tumor.

Do not underestimate your classmates. Do not underestimate your classmates. Do not underestimate your classmates. Do not underestimate your classmates. Do not underestimate your classmates.

You are not as smart as you think you are. You are not as smart as you think you are. You are not as smart as you think you are. You are not as smart as you think you are. You are not as smart as you think you are.

Okay, so in summary, if you want to gamble like that, a MUCH better bet would be to go to a casino and put that $100k or so all on red. What you should really do, as others have said, is take the year off, study incessantly for the LSAT, and rock that shit. It's easier to study for one test than it is to study for 10. Or, you know, all of us who are law students and who post in the transfer board could just be making that up.

[A'nold]

I had a mental block with the LSAT for some reason. I probably could have taken another year off and still sucked (relatively) at it. I was almost certain I would do well at law school though.

[chitown825]

Where are all the flame replies to this one? Got my hopes up for "Cooley 0L transferring to HYS" or "will Harvard care about my 147?"

[kings84_wr]

Though I would never say this in real life to my friends at school or really to anyone before I got my first semester grades, I honestly wanted to transfer from day one.

Albeit I admit that i was content getting graduating here,and i was content practicing in Indiana (and I still am). But Looking back i remember always working for this.

and yeah most the students do have similar lsat/gpa, but I do thinks splitters have a unique advantage, some of us really didn't really work as hard in Ugrad so we never really reached our potential. Ill admit there were times I didn't try 100% (or even 50%) in undergrad, so when I finally gave it my all in law school things really clicked and worked out.

Yeah its a terrible idea to take this risk knowing that you don't want to graduate form the law school, and that you wouldn't want to practice in the region it places in. However I think transferring can be added motivation that helps you really do well. I worked harder then Ive ever worked for anything in my life this semester, and I dont know if I would have had the emotional drive if it wasn't for knowing the bonus' and rewards at the end.

I will say talking and planning on transferring before you ever have one law school class is beyond pointless, thinking about it and using it for motivation is different.

[A'nold]

Though I would never say this in real life to my friends at school or really to anyone before I got my first semester grades, I honestly wanted to transfer from day one.

Albeit I admit that i was content getting graduating here,and i was content practicing in Indiana (and I still am). But Looking back i remember always working for this.

and yeah most the students do have similar lsat/gpa, but I do thinks splitters have a unique advantage, some of us really didn't really work as hard in Ugrad so we never really reached our potential. Ill admit there were times I didn't try 100% (or even 50%) in undergrad, so when I finally gave it my all in law school things really clicked and worked out.

Yeah its a terrible idea to take this risk knowing that you don't want to graduate form the law school, and that you wouldn't want to practice in the region it places in. However I think transferring can be added motivation that helps you really do well. I worked harder then Ive ever worked for anything in my life this semester, and I dont know if I would have had the emotional drive if it wasn't for knowing the bonus' and rewards at the end.

I will say talking and planning on transferring before you ever have one law school class is beyond pointless, thinking about it and using it for motivation is different.

I would definitely say that most splitters are at an advantage and I really don't see how GPA really correlates at all to 1L success but definitely see how the LSAT does.

[ToTransferOrNot]

Meh. LSAT may be the best indicator, but it is still an awful indicator.

[A'nold]

Meh. LSAT may be the best indicator, but it is still an awful indicator.

If everyone were on equal footing as far as hours spent studying, methods, etc. I'd almost say it could predict within 20% a student's first year ranking (relative to classmates).

Also, if you are FAR above a school's 75th, with a good amount of work put in, you should definitely make top 20% or you didn't work hard enough, IMO.

[ToTransferOrNot]

Meh. LSAT may be the best indicator, but it is still an awful indicator.

If everyone were on equal footing as far as hours spent studying, methods, etc. I'd almost say it could predict within 20% a student's first year ranking (relative to classmates).

Also, if you are FAR above a school's 75th, with a good amount of work put in, you should definitely make top 20% or you didn't work hard enough, IMO.

And this explains the fact that transfer students typically do very well at their transfer schools, despite presumably being at the very, very bottom of the LSAT pile... how? Are we to assume that every transfer student didn't work hard enough on the LSAT? I certainly don't think I had a 174 (or whatever Chicago's 80% LSAT percentile is) in me--nor do I think I had a 165 in me (which would have put me at Wisconsin's 80th, I think).

I think you over-estimate that stupid test's ability to measure anything relevant.

[rando]

I would definitely say that most splitters are at an advantage and I really don't see how GPA really correlates at all to 1L success but definitely see how the LSAT does.

Really? I have to say I generally agree with almost everything you post on this board, but I think this is backwards. While LSAT does have something to do with success, GPA makes more sense to me. I realize that GPA's do not correlate very well across schools or majors. That being said, there is a difference between a 4.0 and a 3.0. I just don't think the principles in law school are that difficult. And while there is some logic involved, it is not nearly as rigid as in the LSAT. I also think there is far more to hard work and perseverance in law school than pure smarts.

[ToTransferOrNot]

I would definitely say that most splitters are at an advantage and I really don't see how GPA really correlates at all to 1L success but definitely see how the LSAT does.

Really? I have to say I generally agree with almost everything you post on this board, but I think this is backwards. While LSAT does have something to do with success, GPA makes more sense to me. I realize that GPA's do not correlate very well across schools or majors. That being said, there is a difference between a 4.0 and a 3.0. I just don't think the principles in law school are that difficult. And while there is some logic involved, it is not nearly as rigid as in the LSAT. I also think there is far more to hard work and perseverance in law school than pure smarts.

You're probably doing it wrong.

[kings84_wr]

I would definitely say that most splitters are at an advantage and I really don't see how GPA really correlates at all to 1L success but definitely see how the LSAT does.

Really? I have to say I generally agree with almost everything you post on this board, but I think this is backwards. While LSAT does have something to do with success, GPA makes more sense to me. I realize that GPA's do not correlate very well across schools or majors. That being said, there is a difference between a 4.0 and a 3.0. I just don't think the principles in law school are that difficult. And while there is some logic involved, it is not nearly as rigid as in the LSAT. I also think there is far more to hard work and perseverance in law school than pure smarts.

but the thing about hard work is thats its something you can change and something you can make yourself become. Its a lot harder to suddenly get "smarter" or more logical (not that a high lsat necessarily means that anyway).

Which is why I think splitters do have an advantage, especially ones like me, who's gpa really just represents strange circumstances and not the best effort. If i worked at the level I work in law school I would have been a 4.0 student in Undergrad instead of the 2.9 or whatever I finished with.

[rando]

[

You're probably doing it wrong.

Fail.

[rando]

but the thing about hard work is thats its something you can change and something you can make yourself become. Its a lot harder to suddenly get "smarter" or more logical (not that a high lsat necessarily means that anyway).

Which is why I think splitters do have an advantage, especially ones like me, who's gpa really just represents strange circumstances and not the best effort. If i worked at the level I work in law school I would have been a 4.0 student in Undergrad instead of the 2.9 or whatever I finished with.

This is a logical fallacy in itself. You are saying that you are an exception to the rule. Citing strange circumstances for why you didn't do well. You forget how many stories of poor LSAT performance there are. People that underachieve on test day under strange circumstances. I would argue GPA is a better indicator because it is over a long time period, making it less likely that strange circumstance play as significant a factor.
I also tend to disagree that hard work is something that people can change and make themselves become. Some people can. But if I were going to pick someone to do well at school it would be the person who did well in the past, not just the one that did the best on a standardized test.

[A'nold]

Meh. LSAT may be the best indicator, but it is still an awful indicator.

If everyone were on equal footing as far as hours spent studying, methods, etc. I'd almost say it could predict within 20% a student's first year ranking (relative to classmates).

Also, if you are FAR above a school's 75th, with a good amount of work put in, you should definitely make top 20% or you didn't work hard enough, IMO.

And this explains the fact that transfer students typically do very well at their transfer schools, despite presumably being at the very, very bottom of the LSAT pile... how? Are we to assume that every transfer student didn't work hard enough on the LSAT? I certainly don't think I had a 174 (or whatever Chicago's 80% LSAT percentile is) in me--nor do I think I had a 165 in me (which would have put me at Wisconsin's 80th, I think).

I think you over-estimate that stupid test's ability to measure anything relevant.

That is a very good point but wouldn't that be more of an exception than the rule? I agree with you that I didn't have a 170+ in me, but now that I'm in ls and excelling, I really do think I could have done much better on the LSAT, actually.....I think I was approaching that test all wrong and didn't know it until I succeeded in my 1st semester in ls.

I guess the point is this: you are right about the transfer thing and I really would say that in these cases the LSAT really wasn't a true predictor of our ability, BUT over a general, larger sample of students, I think it does speak volumes as to a law student's potential.

I might have a slightly skewed view because I go to a t3 where I see a large gap b/w the intelligence of a lot of students wrt how well it seems they did on the LSAT and how "quick on the uptake" they are as students. Many of the students here did well in UG b/c they can "work hard" and memorize and regurgitate. I really do believe in the TLS cliche' that hard work can't get you the grades unless you work right. If you were a 4.0 student in UG AND you "work hard" like arrow did (meaning working hard on understanding what you are meant to understand for exams) you might be able to outwork others and achieve top grades.

This UG GPA talk above was also in response to one of the above posters that wondered why I don't think GPA matters.

Law school is a whole different ballgame. I am lucky b/c I picked up on how to think logically when I was raised to think illogically, think in conclusory judgmental statements, and never took the time to get good in math. Those things KILLED me on the LSAT. I have very much concentrated on "thinking like a lawyer" and have concentrated on being more logical.

The LSAT tests your ability to think logically. Unfortunately for me, it also tests reading comprehension and the ability to absorb very detailed texts at once while ignoring all distractions. That is one area I don't think I could really have ever improved on for that test. Luckly for me, ls exams seem to focus on the LR type stuff and a little on LG stuff, less on the RC, I just have to put more hours in than the average person when it comes to reading.

What did all of this have to do with answering ToTransferOrNot's post? Nothing really, I just rambled on and completely lost my train of thought. Sorry dude.


Oh, and another thing: the main point I was trying to make about the LSAT being a great predictor of law school success was really irt splitters. I was a "splitter" I guess, because my school's median LSAT is so low even though my LSAT was about average or a little below average for this site.

If you asked me who would do better at a school with a 155 LSAT, someone with a 172, 2.5 or someone with a 4.0 155, I'd say the 172, 2.5 without hesitation.

[ToTransferOrNot]

[

You're probably doing it wrong.

Fail.

You say to the person who did minimal work 1L, transfered to a T6, and is at the top of the class there (at least for the time being), after doing minimal work.

Hate to break it to you man, but success in law school is based much more on a combination of luck, ability to sense what the professor is going to test, and focused study on various points--a kind of study that is not time consuming at all. Some high level work ethic doesn't mean a hell of a lot--I get out-worked by almost everyone.

[A'nold]

but the thing about hard work is thats its something you can change and something you can make yourself become. Its a lot harder to suddenly get "smarter" or more logical (not that a high lsat necessarily means that anyway).

Which is why I think splitters do have an advantage, especially ones like me, who's gpa really just represents strange circumstances and not the best effort. If i worked at the level I work in law school I would have been a 4.0 student in Undergrad instead of the 2.9 or whatever I finished with.

This is a logical fallacy in itself. You are saying that you are an exception to the rule. Citing strange circumstances for why you didn't do well. You forget how many stories of poor LSAT performance there are. People that underachieve on test day under strange circumstances. I would argue GPA is a better indicator because it is over a long time period, making it less likely that strange circumstance play as significant a factor.
I also tend to disagree that hard work is something that people can change and make themselves become. Some people can. But if I were going to pick someone to do well at school it would be the person who did well in the past, not just the one that did the best on a standardized test.

No way dude, at least not at schools ranked probably less than t30. The intelligence that is tested on the LSAT is FAR more relevant than any major. The people who usually do the best as far as UG is concerned are science, math, or engineering grads. Many of these people SUCK at writing and hate reading with a fiery passion, yet they outperform many history/english type majors. It is a whole different way of thinking. That is actually one of the secrets, IMO, to my success. I convinced myself before starting that I was at a disadvantage by the way I was taught to think and express those thoughts. In fact, I received a crappy median grade on my first LRW assignment and just received the very highest grade in the class this time around. I began deconsructing my paper in a mathematical way and decided to dump everything that I thought I knew about writing. I am a writing robot now, and it WORKS.

UG and UG grades are LARGELY irrelevant IMO, but, I admit, it is just my opinion.

[A'nold]

[

You're probably doing it wrong.

Fail.

You say to the person who did minimal work 1L, transfered to a T6, and is at the top of the class there (at least for the time being), after doing minimal work.

Hate to break it to you man, but success in law school is based much more on a combination of luck, ability to sense what the professor is going to test, and focused study on various points. Some high level work ethic doesn't mean a hell of a lot--I get out-worked by almost everyone.

TITCR on getting outworked by a lot of students, but I don't agree with the "luck" thing. I may be in the minority on this site, but I think that luck has very little to do with ls grades. I wasn't lucky when I researched how each of my professors wanted their exams answered and it wasn't luck that I bolded, underlined, exclamation marked, 42 fonted subtle exam specific stuff that came out of their mouths while the rest of the class sat there staring at the professor waiting for the professor to talk about some useless case facts so they could start typing again.