CLR vs. Lysol
I can certainly appreciate that anxiety/anticipation that is building up in rising 2Ls regarding CLR. But I want to offer this word of caution, echoed in years past by my co-blogger Tom Fletcher. It's a great feeling to know that you are on Boalt's flagship journal, but it's not the end of the world if you're not. Frankly, it opens up your calendar to do more, exciting things. I think journal work is very useful. Thankfully, Boalt has plenty of opportunity for everyone to gain exposure to that work, sometimes in very different contexts.
In sum, I know the comments are going to turn into a clusterf*ck with dejected, self-loathing overachievers actually coming to grips that they are not on CLR. But cheer up. It doesn't hurt you in OCIP, and it's not a magic ticket that you need to get punched on your way to clerkships.
In sum, I know the comments are going to turn into a clusterf*ck with dejected, self-loathing overachievers actually coming to grips that they are not on CLR. But cheer up. It doesn't hurt you in OCIP, and it's not a magic ticket that you need to get punched on your way to clerkships.
Labels: CLR
posted by Armen Adzhemyan at 8:16 AM
57 Comments:
I ageee 100% with Armen. I was on CLR and wish I had not done it.
This is not to say it is not a meaningful experience, but I personally found work on other journals to be more interesting and found more unity and cohesiveness in other organizations.
Historically, law reviews have gained their prestige and clout because of the writing and editing experience offered to the membership. The way CLR is structured, you are not automatically published (say, like how ELQ, BTLJ, Crim Law Journal offer writing seminars), and you don't truly get the feedback in editing (you simply submit it to a 3L who then takes it to the author). That said, you don't truly get a 1-1 experience, or a mentorship relationship with another editor to learn how to write better.
So, even if you do make it on, you might not get the experience you want. I highly recommend trying to write for ELQ, BTLJ, BJCL that will allow you to have that exposure.
With respect to OCIP and clerkships, while it does not hurt your resume and truthfully some institutions find it as a proxy for other measures, those who know Boalt will look beyond the box. In fact, most of the recent alums who are clerking at circuit courts were *NOT* on CLR at the beginning of 3L year.
If you are just in it for the line on your resume, I'd strongly suggest "publishing on" rather than "writing on." CLR accepts submissions from non-member students. It is usually a smaller pool, and if you are accepted, you know you will be published. And you get out of a year's worth of grunt work.
Lysol, please.
It can matter quite a bit for clerkships.
I wonder what the accept rate is for people who actually turn in the applications.
I know that moot court, by way of comparison, is pretty unfront about their "accept rate" ...
Does anyone know when CLR will start telling people?
I was a CLR member and agree with most of what is said. It's not for everyone. I enjoyed it most of the time. I met a lot of people I otherwise would not have known and I think I am most thankful for that part of it. I was not on a journal my first year because none of the topics interested me and I was turned off by those mandatory bluebooking parties.
My other thought is that I was always impressed at how smart and hard working SOME of the people on CLR were. This wasn't a universal thing, but I noticed it on quite a few occassions. Some of these people may not get clerkships, but I think they would be outstanding clerks.
However, concerning the people with COA clerkships who were not on CLR. There is a little more going on here. I know that many of them chose not to write on to CLR because they 1) knew their grades were really good (hats off to them for that) and 2) several had signed on for other commitments at the end of the 1st year. Some later got onto CLR by having their papers published. I also suspect this year's class was unique in having so many of the really top students opt out of the write on process, maybe I'm incorrect in this assumption. I had the impression that in other years, the top people also tended to be on CLR too (such as the former EIC of CLR from two years ago or last year's number 1 student).
A lot of the top students were not accepted onto CLR, probably because they were not diverse enough.
A lot of the top students were not accepted onto CLR, probably because they were not diverse enough.
Totally second Armen's comments -- even as a member myself. The selection process is "meritocratic" only in the most ridiculously lenient sense of the word. Between the lack of grades factoring in, the barely cursory read-throughs of the packets(trust me); the readers' general lack of knowledge about the case; and the, ahem, politics, at work (enough said), it's a crapshoot.*
As a result, it's a rather open secret at Boalt that the faculty don't respect CLR terribly much, and that translates into most judges and employers in California not respecting it as much (they either are "in the know" or they hear it from the profs), and so they value CLR exponentially less than service on the flagship journal of another school.
So if you've got reasonably good grades, take the rejection in stride, cause it won't really matter that much for employers or clerkships.
If you don't have decent grades (or you're applying to out-of-state employers or judges), then, yeah, a CLR good star will help a little, but it's not dipositive.
*Note, it's only a crapshoot for about the 2/3 of Boalt students who are fairly competent writers. For about 1/3 of you (judging from your packets), I was shitstruck at how atrociously illiterate you are. I mean, some students seem barely able to form a sentence. I don't know how or why you were admitted to Boalt. Maybe Boalt should stop bragging about how it cares so much about undergraduate GPA if that GPA can be obtained completely and entirely without knowing how to form a sentence.
12:46 - true or not, that little note is grossly un-Boaltie, if you will, and needlessly mean when people spent a week right after 1L finals jumping through clr's silly hoops. And I'm a 3L without a care in the world how you judged the latest set of packets.
If you check the masthead, lots of white people are still getting on. I am one of them. Please leave the race baiting to another blog.
Lots of white people may be getting on, but at least the years I was at Boalt, a disproportionate number of minorities/under-represented groups (LGBT, etc.) got on relative to their numbers at Boalt.
Why is it impossible to have a conversation about the affirmative action policies of CLR without being accused of "race baiting?"
I agree. Not very persuasive, 1:06. 'I am white, I wrote on, so did many other white people, therefore white people cannot possibly face an additional obstacle in writing on and the process is fair.' Moreover 'you're race-baiting to suggest otherwise.' Your logic helps prove the unstated premise that CLR is open to the feeble-minded.
A lot of people will get rejected. At least rejected 'persons of color' will rest assured that their packets were qualitatively inferior.
For those of you with great grades who were sure you would make it on and didn't: don't worry about it. It's not worth getting worked up about the politics of the organization or the write-on process. As a previous commenter noted, there are a lot of clerks who weren't on CLR. There are a lot of people who work at law firms who weren't on CLR. Not getting onto CLR won't close any doors for you. Anyone who went to law school in recent history is aware of how law reviews function these days and how plausible it is that a really good candidate either wasn't accepted in the write-on competition or didn't bother to apply.
The number one student from 2007 was not really number one, and the real number one student was not on CLR. It doesn't really matter, though, both are COA clerks.
Journals are great experience, I would really encourage everyone to do one (or more). You will also learn the most from publishing and going through the editing process (although it will be hellish at the time, at least if you have a good editor). Being on the flagship journal still matters to some employers, but if your grades are good and you had a substantive position on another journal, not being on CLR is not going to hold you back. Good luck, everyone.
1:56
OK sour grapes - you want to open that door again? The TM award goes to the person with the best GPA after five semesters. By "the real number one student" from 2007, I assume you refer to the person with the best GPA after three semesters at Boalt. That person was ineligible for the award by definition, having not spent five semesters at Boalt.
I think it's time to get over it.
I didn't realize there was a known scandal re: person in Class of '07 with the highest GPA! Seriously though, transfer students should be on their own curve. 1L classes have the strictest curves, and transfers are at a huge advantage by not having them count toward their cumulative GPA.
I am currently on CLR and must admit that the quality of the casenotes was not great. The biggest issue was that people chose not to follow directions . . . there are page limits for a reason!
That being said, I heard (just a rumor) that everyone has a 1 in 3 chance of getting on to CLR.
3:27:
The odds were even better last year. That's why I don't get the whining over admissions. I read the packets last year. Some were not very good, sorry to say. Now, I wasn't on the final cut and did not read the diversity essays, but I really believe based on my own grading that if you wrote a quality note, you got on.
That's at least better than when someone ends up number one after six semesters but is different from the person who wins the award at graduation and gets the resume item for life (probably doesn't happen all that often, but I know it happened at least once to a partner's classmate and he never tires of bringing it up when the person who ultimately finished first tries to brag - "uhm, but I thought ___ graduated first in our class?" leading to a feverish explanation of how the award only counts the first five semesters).
If anyone needs any further good reasons not to do CLR, imagine working with 12:46.
Transfer students didn’t even receive ordinal ranks (meaning, top 10 in the class) then, so it seems wrong for anyone to assert what ordinal rank a transfer student had at a point when they were, by definition, completely outside the ordinal ranking process. Other top schools have similar approaches to class rank. It’s also well known at Boalt that not counting first year grades toward class rank would give a very unfair advantage to transfers, who skipped the onerous, strictly enforced curve of Boalt’s first year (hence the five-semester prerequisite for ordinal ranking) and could select whatever classes they wanted 2L and 3L years (some of which don’t have curves and some of which can be taken for credit/no-credit). A ranking system that tracks the Boalties who have been at the school since day one makes lots of sense. The only thing we know for sure about valedictorians of this year, last year, or any year is who the school announces as having graduated first in class at the time of graduation. (And the school also likes to mention the number of AmJur’s and Prossers won, which I understand was extremely impressive last year.) The rest is speculation. So I tip my hat to those top-of-the class Boalties of years past and years future – congrats. And I also applaud the academic and non-academic achievements of all students at Boalt, whether they be recognized or not on graduation day.
A note to the 3Ls who are currently reading case notes -- you may be critical now, but realize that your case note appeared similar to us, c/o 2008, last year. I don't think anyone in my packet truly understood the plurality opinion, but I didn't hold it against you all because I understand what it felt like to have just completed 1L year and to deal with a topic I had never encountered.
Just because you made it on and have one year of cite-checking and source-collection experience doesn't mean you're perfect. So don't criticize the 1Ls.
Is 6:05 a response to 5:05, because the 5:05 story involves two non-transfers, one who was #1 after five semesters, and the other who was #1 (and bitter) after six. The latter looks ridiculous bringing up rank twenty-something years later, which is why the partner enjoys teasing them. Most top schools don't rank anyone, at least judging from clerkship applications, so I'm not sure why we should further rank and delineate students based on whether they were here two years or three. I agree we should copy other schools, in that I think we should stop ranking and just have order of the coif and maybe something for people in the top 2-3% like Columbia and Harvard. The difference between #1 and 2 has more to do with whether you took a clinic instead of fed courts than how smart you are, and there's already too much silly ranking in the law.
6:05 appears to be a response (and sensible one at that) to the sketchy speculation about transfer rank that appeared earlier in this thread, not the non-transfer vs. non-transfer story. Anyway, Boalt probably should move to a Columbia-style system (Harlan Fiske, etc.) to recognize academic achievement, though Columbia, like Boalt, Harvard, Stanford, and a slew of other top schools, still gives out a valedictorian award, often at graduation, to the person ranked first in the class.
As for CLR (the intended subject of this thread), I don't think we should worry about it either way. There're lots of great activities at Boalt. We should just focus on what we like to do, and everything (hopefully) should work out well.
The prior posters are correct that it is likely that most, if not all, California judges and 9th Circuit judges are aware that a lack of CLR membership is not a reason to skip over a clerkship application. I'm not sure that the same can be said for most judges outside California or the 9th Circuit. Boalties who want to leave the west would do well to advocate for the Columbia-esque system suggested by 7:05pm as one means to reassure east coast judges and also to escape the "sort by rank" feature on OSCAR.
I wrote onto CLR and am just wondering if all the acceptees were already notified. I heard that people are initially told by telephone and then receive the acceptance packets in the mail.
To be honest, I had forgotten all about the write-on until I saw the post tonight.
Just curious.
Enjoying my summer too much to let this get me down.
I hope your write-on packet was clearer than that post, 9:16PM.
(sorry, I had to...)
9:16 - are you saying you heard about this years competition?
You'll hear back in late July or early August. The final results have not been tallied yet.
10:04 - No. I didn't hear about the notification system for this year's competition. I was only relaying general information from the grapevine.
10:33 - Thanks for the clarification.
9:23 - I re-read what I wrote. You're right it wasn't that clear. I, too, hope that my write-on app was better organized than that post!
Let me first state that CLR has nothing to do with how "smart" you are, or how well you perform in classes. If you like reading articles, editing, and are thinking about contributing to the world of legal writing in the future, then it might be (relatively) fun. A secondary journal might be a much better fit for you and your time, though, depending on your interests. There's much less "value added" or return on your time for employers or clerkships.
12:46, what journals are you reading? Harvard, Yale, and Stanford's? CLR comes in the top five as a "flagship" journal, and its admissions criteria are nearly identical to Yale's. Did the criteria for admission somehow make YLJ (#2 for a flagship) also suck? I'm for collegiality, and given that the skills for a successful editor are NOT the same as the skills for racking up a high GPA, maybe there's value in an alternative model.
9:44,
To me, your use of "skills" in the last sentence demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the admissions criteria for CLR. You know what I mean.
Anyone know if CLR calls have started to go out (or where they will be coming from when they do)? I got calls from a strange 510 and 540 number this morning - relatively close to each other - but no message from either.
LOL. Oh boy. I hope the CLR 3Ls have a fun time with THIS bunch of incomings.
Relax, friends. A little birdie told me that calls will not start going out 'til the end of next week at the very earliest.
I don't mean this in a cruel way, but after a few years of observing who made CLR and did or did not get elected to editor positions (and that goes for any journal's elections), by graduation time I thought it was a joke - if you don't get on, please don't feel bad about yourself!
any updates?
i heard they started calling
Can someone confirm this?
I am on CLR and I don't think that phone calls have been made. I have no basis to think this, but last year when people started hearing, they quickly started posting on nuts and boalts (and telling their friends).
So... when the calls start going out, you will all know. I know it's taking a little longer than anticipated, but please, try to be patient.
I'm so embarassed. I know I have no time for CLR, and it would be a blessing in disguise if I didn't make it. But my heart sank when I read that some folks already received an acceptance call (looks like that is untrue). So now I'm loathing myself for wanting so desperately to make it on, for caring about what 12:46 wrote, for writing that crappy casenote, and for giving up a week of vacation to write something so awful. And I'm also hating myself for caring what any of you think, since if I do make it on half of you will think I'm a douchebag gunner and the other half will think I just made it because I'm a minority. I'm going to lunch before I hang myself.
If you attach this much importance to others' perception of you, then you have far, far bigger issues than getting or not getting on CLR. I'm not saying finding out you didn't make it is a good feeling. It's not. But what I'm saying is that with a little perspective you will realize it's not nearly as tragic as you think. In fact, it's not tragic at all.
any idea why it is taking longer than usual? Did more people apply this year?
I don't think the calls have begun. If they had, someone would have posted online "I got onto CLR!" That's how it worked last year.
I know it is difficult, but please try to relax and not think about it. Or maybe, someone can contact the people in charge of the write-on and ask?
Just a thought. Good luck!
Oh, Armen. I had no idea how incredibly neurotic I was until you responded to my comment.
I need a new therapist. Interested?
11:33
11:33 -- on the off chance you weren't joking, I recommend Linda Z*ruba, a psychologist at Tang. She's really good.
http://www.uhs.berkeley.edu/Students/Counseling/names.shtml
law review calls have begun. I got mine today at around noon.
can someone confirm?
I can confirm.
Show must be over. If calling started yesterday morning / afternoon, then that's it. How long does it take to call 50 people?
Does anyone know for sure if the show is over?
Based on how it was done last year, I think they are done. Congrats to those who made it on, and for those of you who didn't, it really is not a big deal. There are so many other activities you can participate in at Boalt, so it may be a blessing in disguise.
Now that I received my official ding letter from CLR (twice, I might add), I'm coping fine, but I have the following unanswered questions (and am not sure who is best to ask, so I thought I would start here):
1. Writing on by publishing a student comment - worth it? just as much of a crapshoot as the competition? waste of time?
2. If I choose to work on a student comment, what can I be doing to improve my odds of success?
3. If I'm someone who didn't do a journal last year - mainly because I didn't have a strong interest in any of the areas covered by the other journals offered at Boalt - should I be hopping onto one of them this fall to improve my chances with OCIP? (I realize this may depend on the type of practice I'm hoping to get into, along with many other variables, so let's say I'm shooting for general litigation.)
4. How should I deal with employers that require or request journal experience?
I don't get 3 and 4. What is this fascination with "aiming to please." Who gives a flying f*** what employers expect. Do what you want to do. If they ask why no journal experience, give them an honest answer: "I don't care about environmental law or any of the other topics." If they "require" journal experience, then don't work for them. It's that simple. You really can control your own activities, believe it or not.
I'm going to borrow an analogy that an older law student passed on to me. Law school is a bit like the turtles riding the jet stream in Finding Nemo. And if you don't follow the path, then you're spinning out of control into the abyss. Well, screw the jet stream. You're at a law school that prides itself for assembling a student body with probably the most diverse career interests anywhere.
I still think journal work helps you become a better writer and lawyer. But that's the reason I did it. Not because I thought it looks great on a resume.
As for writing on by publishing a comment, it is worth it. But be prepared--if your article gets accepted, you have to go through CLR's editing process, which is frustrating. But you have the satisfaction of a published piece, which helps the memory of the editing hazing fade.
Take a small seminar that requires a final paper. Then take the writing and research seriously. Have your professor look at drafts, and re-write your paper. It can serve for your writing requirement. Submit it to CLR, and to other journals in case CLR doesn't bit. The process is worthwhile.
Post a Comment
<< Home