1L Grades
January 23rd, 2008 by Jesse Stellato
One L’s received their grades yesterday. Some were happy, some sad. And some were mad. The happy were counting days until making law review, where they will labor happily in the dark corners of the library before taking over the legal profession. “See id,” said one member of the law review, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The sad contemplated dropping out, and reminisced about the halcyon days of yesteryear when they weren’t mired in debt and job opportunities seemed to abound. The mad grumbled at the grade gloaters, and maybe at the administration’s slipperiness: as we now know, the administration promised students access to their “posted grades,” not their “grades,” by January 2 in return for filling out course evaluations.
Eagleionline Transcendent Question(s) of the Day: (For 1Ls) What do you think you accomplished this past semester? (For 2Ls and 3Ls) How important are 1L grades in the whole scheme of things?
We understand that grade distributions and class rank are a subject of some speculation among 1Ls. Here are the following approximate grade Distributions for Classes of 2009 and 2008, as of June 2007.
Percentile Class of 2009 Class of 2008
95% 3.78 3.68
90% 3.63 3.61
85% 3.57 3.55
80% 3.51 3.51
75% 3.47 3.45
70% 3.39 3.42
65% 3.34 3.39
60% 3.30 3.36
55% 3.28 3.33
50% 3.24 3.29
Nothing new, but if you want to work for a big firm, 1L grades are huge.
Also, a “friend” told me law review is a soul-sucking, brain-numbing routine….but you still can’t turn it down.
(Ir)regardless of what anyone says, grades are everything. If you don’t get good grades, you are screwed.
If any of you responds that grades are of average importance and that gooey things like “the search for justice” and “helping others” are reasons you are here, these pursuits are not a salve for being stupid. You help a lot more people working in biglaw than you do in public interest or, God/Garvey (same thing?)-forbid, the government.
You should seriously consider dropping out if you are below top third as you will continue to accumulate debt that you will likely not pay off until you are 70 years old, if at all.
Frank,
“you help a lot more people working in biglaw than you do in public interest”
There are plenty of arguments in favor of working at biglaw, but helping people isn’t one of them.
If Frank is a role model then I guess my sarcasm muscle will be functioning as a 2L next year…
2L’s and 3L’s : We know this is old hat to you, but but be a little kinder to the 1L’s who are freaking out (some might say overreacting) about grades. Indulge us and Garvey will put in a good word with the Big Guy.
Thank you, Frank, for demonstrating that the correlation between intelligence and grades is a tenuous one at best.
How important grades are grades? Very important, but as with all answers, it depends. If you got so-so grades or worse, you probably cannot:
– clerk for a prestigious court,
– become a Greenfield-esque, ivory tower law professor,
– work in biglaw, or
– get a prestigious government post.
Two things to note, however. First, these rules of thumb apply the most to your first job out of law school, and less as time goes on. So (Garvey help you) if your dream is to work in biglaw and you cannot make it out of law school, you can lateral to it later on in your career if you have proven yourself in the legal field. Second, biglaw is not the be all end all of the legal profession. Public interest lawyers may not have the money Frank will in 10 years, but they won’t have the beer gut and alimony payments either.
If you’re a 1L and your grades suck:
(a) do what you can to bring your GPA up, and
(b) do NOT rely on OCI/Career Services for a job. With thought, persistence, and charisma you will still get a job, but the task will require YOU putting in the time and legwork.
The post stated, “‘See id,’ said one member of the law review, who spoke on condition on anonymity.”
If a law review member says, “See id.,” then you are being directed to consult the previously-cited source. If, on the other hand, s/he says, “See id,” then you are being directed to examine the deep wellspring of your most illogical, lustful, animalistic desires.
“you can lateral to it later on in your career if you have proven yourself in the legal field.”
i think this is pretty bad advice. everyone knows that climbing up the ladder (from small firm or PI to big firm) is a LOT harder than going the other way (big firm to whatever).
Also, unless you know that your father’s firm is hiring you after graduation, great grades will mean options. If you have great grades and journal experience from BC your options are wide open (except maybe Wachtell and SCOTUS clerkships).
Now on a more positive note, I’m assuming its the same, but for for us, fall semester was only worth 12 credits while spring was worth 21. That’s a HUGE difference, so if you didn’t do well in fall, just step your game up.
Also,
“biglaw is not the be all end all of the legal profession.” is true.
2L,
I didn’t say that lateraling to biglaw was easy, just that it was possible.
Great grades and journal experience do open a lot of doors. That is why it is important for students without those things (the people we are presumably posting for) to not rely on OCI and create their own opportunities.
I’m a 1L who recently got grades back and recieved two B’s and a B+. I’m not exactly thrilled with my grades, but i know there are alot of people out there that did worse. It’s just frustrating working so hard and only getting average results. Any advice from upperclassmen besides to go hang myself or shut up?
Must get the grade…
…if you want to get paid.
…or laid.
…which I have not been able to do yet. I was telling this girl about my 3.5 at a bar last night and she just walked away. I’ll get the last laugh though — wait until she sees my 3.6!
Make a list of everyone you know in the legal field and start making calls to get an interesting summer job with connections to the kind of work you want to land after school.
I am a 3L who got grades very simliar to the ones you mentioned (two B’s and a B+). I “stepped up my game” in the next semester and raised the average a teensy bit, and networked to get a job at a good little boutique law firm after my 1st year. The thing that landed me my big firm job was the networking, not the grades. I worked hard that summer, got a stellar recommendation from the name partner at the tiny firm, he made some calls, and I landed a summer position at a big firm at which I will start in the fall. You can do this.
I got around the same grades as you did. I think I might have gotten a B-, too. First year was looking pretty bleak, but I kept trying and finally landed a public interest job. the partner i worked with had lots of connections, and offered to help get me hired at Boston BIGLAW. Moral of the story is that things have a way of working out for people, even middling BC Law people.
Assuming you want to end up in BIGLAW, and can’t get anything for the summer, take whatever public interest job you can find, work your ass off, and try to get one of the people in your firm to help you find a big-paying job for the next summer.
Also, if the option is available to you, ask your mom/dad/uncle/aunt/cousin for a job. No shame in pulling connections at this point.
Good luck.
My grades blew 1L year and for the first semester of 2nd year. Since then (the past two semesters), I have made a big jump, but those grades are irrelevant to the job I am going to as I got that summer opportunity (which led to my post-grad job) as a first-semester 2L. I did OCI, but because my grades sucked more than a Backstreet Boys reunion concert, it was mostly just a waste of time (except the few interviews I did get garnered me some interviewing experience).
Come late in that first semester 2L year, I was able to luck/trick my way into a Biglaw callback (the initial interview was not through OCI, but through a phone interview I got by mailing a very direct cover letter).
My strong desire to work in the niche field and at that firm got me a summer offer. The rest is history.
Bottomline: Good 1L grades can make your life a lot easier. Bad 1L grades can tank the start of your career, but only if you let them.
The only benefit to biglaw is that your two-timing whore of an ex-wife gets more money out of you when she up and leaves the commonwealth for a shitty major league baseball player and takes her three kids, two of which are yours and the third is anyone’s guess, with her.
I got mostly As and A minuses in law school and now I make a ton of cash. As a result, I am probably better than you. Just FYI.
How important would you 2L and 3L’s say non-grade related things are (excluding Law Review or journal work which is, of course, grade related)? I’m thinking of moot court or clinics or something. Do they provide a good boost? Are they worth the time? Or do they merely put a pretty ribbon on the decomposing carcass of a bad transcript?
AJ,
Moot Court can help a lot if you get on a national team. When you start 2L OCI you will see a lot of law firms saying “Law Journal and/or Moot Court preferred” (or required, although required rarely means required or my firm that said “top 25% and law journal required” wouldn’t have hired me).
I haven’t done a clinic, but at the very least they will help you gain some perspective on what you want to do and some quasi real world experience. How much a big corporate law firm cares that you helped a poor old lady keep her apartment, I don’t know, but it seems like they would place value on the “real world” experience aspect of it.
I think what you can and should do is take as many opportunities as you can reasonably handle AND don’t limit yourselves just to the opportunities BC provides. This is especially true with career services. They do a great job of placing the top 30-50%, but beyond that, you’re really on your own. The earlier you realize this–provided your grades don’t put you in competition for most OCI/big firm opportunities–the better off you are. Get out and network, express real interest in firms/employers, people, and fields. Figure out what it is you want to do and where you want to be and dedicate yourself 110% to that goal.
Good luck.
AJ,
There are too many variables in your question to provide an effective answer.
If you are wondering whether a clinic or moot court will somehow substitute for law review or cum laude grades in the eyes of biglaw, no, they will not.
Whether a clinic, moot court, or whatever is valuable depends entirely on you and your goals. Like I said, if you are still gunning for biglaw, you probably won’t get much out of them (from a resume standpoint, anyway).
But suppose you want to work at a DA’s office and are competing against someone with a higher GPA but no related work experience. You, on the other hand, did summer work at another DA’s office, did a clinic involving lots of oral advocacy, and advanced a couple of rounds in moot court. I would argue that these experiences (if highlighted properly) would be more valuable than the higher GPA.
1Ls,
Don’t get freaked out if you don’t have a job yet. I got nothing in the fall, nothing from the Suffolk PI fair. Then I started applying to every single opening that was on Symplicity and was like 0-40 despite having a 3.6 from first semester. Fall grades mean pretty much nothing for the 1L summer search in my experience. I was so scared of not finding something, so sick of looking and churning out cover letters, but the Symplicity postings kept coming and finally, at the end of April, I found an amazing job that paid like $25/hr. So if you’re not getting any positive responses yet, or haven’t started looking, don’t worry, there will be plenty of opportunities later in the semester.
Do people get As first semester? Or are A-s generally the highest people go?
Second, does second semester pull the curve at all? Or is the curve valid per semester?
People do get A’s first semester. The curve is per class, per semester — i.e., the average grade in Torts should be a 3.2 or whatever.
It’s Shawn Kemp’s.
I would say that the curve posted on the beginning of this thread is not really valid for 1st semester. There is not enough classes to make a valid distribution 1st semester. So while the grade distribution is a good approximation, it doesn’t represent where everyone stands now. However, if you got the same grades next semester, you can figure out where you would fall (approximately).
As for whether 1Ls get A’s, about 10% are given in each class. The break down for 1L classes is in that guide they give out in the beginning of the year. It is just “suggested” to the profs, but I would guess most follow it. It is as follows: 10% A, 15% A-, 25% B+, 35% B, 10% B-, 5% C+ and below
Just an FYI, under the current system the top 10%ish grade onto the law review (technically the journal of their choice, but most all pick the main law review). The last few spots on the BCLR and the other journals are filled through the writing competition.
Dear 1Ls:
Grades are not everything. Seriously. I was in the Bottom 50% of the class. But I still got a job in NY through OCI.
If you did not do too well, take the writing competition serious. Play up your pre-law school experience. Also it helps to work for a Judge over this summer. It is a great experience and it looks good on your resume. Don’t bother with a firm job.
I hadn’t realized most law students are complete tools.
1Ls, grades do matter but first semester grades do not. It’s your GPA at the end of your first year that matters most and that is primarily determined by second semester grades.
I found my first and second semester grades were about the same, but that probably is not the case for everyone. If things worked for you, keep doing them. If they didn’t change it up and buckle down.
If you can accept that until the end of the semester you will not have a social life and you remember that the point of law school is to think like your professors, then your grades should improve.
Also, if you did well, don’t go telling everyone about it!
1Ls,
The truth is that hiring practices at large law firms (why must we persist in saying Biglaw?) are no less arbitrary than admissions to law school. The inflated role that the LSAT plays in law school admissions, 1L grades play in hiring decisions. Why? Not because one’s grades are predictive of anything useful. It is, rather, because it is a convenient fiction to imagine that grades provide a means of “objective” comparison. And that is important, in turn, because massive firms do not particularly care whom they hire from a school like BC Law—almost all candidates presenting themselves will be qualified to do the work expected of them in the first several years (i.e., document review).
So, if you are lucky enough to get extremely high 1L grades, then you will have an easy time of getting your foot in the door initially. If your grades are less “impressive” (more on this shortly), then you will have a more difficult time—regardless of how intelligent you are. Sad but true. But you should not be discouraged or give up. You will find that some firms are much more thoughtful and discerning in their hiring practices—particularly smaller firms / offices. Another important tip, if you are not in the top 15% or so, is to send letters and resumes to firms directly—even those that participate in OCI. Not infrequently, firms will grant a first-round interview upon receiving such an application even if they have declined to extend an on-campus interview.
Finally, a word about the intellectual significance of grades. In short, there is none. Grades, on the basis of what I have seen in the past three years, correlate to neither intelligence nor diligence. They are, in every sense of the word, arbitrary. This is not to deprecate those on law review; it is, rather, to say nothing about them. And that is appropriate, because nothing can be inferred concerning one’s relative intelligence or legal aptitude from his or her membership on law review. Or from his or her position in the bottom 50% of the class. If you have any doubt concerning the arbitrariness of grades, go see your professor and ask that he or she justify it. Argue when he or she makes an invalid point and witness the complete lack of willingness to engage. You will not succeed in having your grade changed, but that is not the goal. The utility derives from the unparalleled demonstration of how truly baseless law school grades tend to be.
Cynical,
Have to disagree with you on grades.
I am not sure to what extent they measure intelligence but they certainly measure diligence. Generally speaking, people who put in more time studying get better grades. And that is not a bad thing; from everything that I have heard, diligence and grunt work constitute large parts of what a lawyer does.
Yes, grades are random to an extent. We all have done well on a test that we thought we failed and visa versa. But how do you explain students who never get below an A- in 3 years of law school? Or those who never get above a B? Are these individuals that lucky/unlucky? No; the quality of their work differed.
Law school exams are frustrating because law is not a hard science like math, where answers are objectively right or wrong. Law professors grade according to their individual, subjective tastes. But don’t judges make rulings according to their individual tastes? Knowing how to bullshit and think like a professor is a useful skill because it correlates to legal work, for better or worse.
Personally, I am a little tired of the canard that gets repeated endlessly about how in general, people who work “harder” get “better” grades. To begin with, measuring how “hard” a student works is problematic in and of itself. Does it mean that the student who spends hours pouring over hornbooks, supplements, outlines, and doing previous exams is working “harder” than a student who may actually be spending fewer hours on these endeavors?
I find it a little presumptuous to state that students at the bottom of the class “generally” did not work as “hard” (however you measure that) as the students at the top of the class at a place like BC. Students don’t slack off here, and the fact of the matter is with a mandatory curve, and virtually all students working to the best of their ability, some students are going to get poor grades, regardless of their “diligence and grunt work”.
From a wise law school grad:
“The best I could conclude, after three years of labor unequaled, is that the correlation between work and grades is only sort of random. Every so often you’ll get an aberration: a superhigh or superlow grade that’s clearly unwarranted. But most of the time, a constant level of work invested will lead to outcomes that usually stay above a certain floor. And the magical flashes of brilliance? I never did manage to reverse engineer those. But anyone who tells you that you can get them simply by working hard enough is either lying or unaware of their own talent.”
Keep in mind that the incoming class profile for this year’s 1Ls had a GPA split of 3.44/3.78 from undergrad. In other words, virtually everyone is used to averaging above a B+, and more likely seeing some form of A in their grades.
Part of the shock of law school grades is the artificially imposed curve. Grades in one sense could indicate the quality of one’s work objectively, but professors are forced to do the job of firm recruiters by placing students of equal ability into a hierarchy.
The difference between an A and a B exam will be readily apparent, but between an A- and B+, or more importantly, a B+ and a B can often be described as arbitrary. In reality, there is a high pass, pass, and low pass distinction among the student body. The difference between BC and law schools without formal grades is that we scrutinize that middle category.
In my experience, one’s grade in a class correlates to how well one has figured out what that professor wants to hear, and how well you phrased it as that professor wanted it phrased.
From my own experience and that of everyone with whom I’ve spoken, I’ve seen no correlation between grades and any of the following: intelligence, wit, knowledge of law, time spent reading, studying, or outlining (or anything else). Those seem to be helpful only to the extent that they help one figure out what & how the prof wants.
I recommend trying to get past exams and sample answers. Add some reverse engineering to your study time. And go to office hours, to talk with the prof and find out what they like.
Good luck.
Isn’t that exactly what lawyers do…figure out what the Judge wants to hear and then deliver it to the judge.
Maybe, law school exams don’t measure your ability to understand every nuance or to memorize large amounts of material. But they might measure your ability to WIN, whether it be by superior intelligence, craftiness etc. Which in the end is what most legal employers are looking for.
Agreed with people that said hard work isn’t everything. To be sure there is a threshold of effort that needs to be met for even the smartest among us (If you can never go to class, never read a case, and still get an A on an exam, well, you probably should be at Yale). Once you hit that threshold, however, brains becomes a huge factor. The only way to get an A is to be creative and come up with things other people haven’t. Sure, the better you know the material the more info you have to draw these connections, but it still takes some intelligence and creativity, and a certain mindset that not everyone has. Some people can’t think outside the box so even if they study for years, they’ll never get a straight A.
Most professors that grade on a checkmark/point/list system aren’t gonna penalize you if you make a stretch. So hit all the major points, but then feel free to draw in something from another class, or discuss some case that doesn’t quite fit, but might have implications. Get creative with your solutions to problems. After reading 200 pages of the same offer/consideration/acceptance garble, you have to know that they’re gonna perk up a bit when someone thinks of something no other student thought of(or even better, something they didn’t think of).
Also, when it comes to LRRW, that is one class where the more hours you put in, the more you refine it, the better it will be. I didn’t heed this advice very well, but the thing that saved me was the end of the semester research exam. Below average on both writing assignments, still managed a B+ in the class, likely because of that.
“Isn’t that exactly what lawyers do…figure out what the Judge wants to hear and then deliver it to the judge.”
No. Most legal work never sees a court.
Bob, can you provide a bit more insight re: the LRRW research exam? Is it take-home? How much time is allowed? How much is it worth?
To “Red” and to “To Red” -
I agree with both of you. “To Red” is right that most legal work doesn’t see a court. Yet, “Red” is right that the goal of legal work is to win (legally, right? Let’s keep it within the rules and above the belt, folks).
Figure out what it takes to win, in grades and in work, and you’ll do very well.