Law School

To add to the list of things that can keep you from practicing law: taking on so much debt that you can't pay it back and get dinged by the bar committee.

Today's NYT has an astonishing story about a 47-year-old who started at Hastings Law School back in 2000, decided to throw in a master's degree, and then found himself trying to carry student loans of $230,000. By now, that amount has spiraled to $400,000 because of interest and penalties, during a time when he wasn't able to practice law yet because he had some difficulty passing the bar exam (he had to take it three times).

He concedes that he hasn't made a single payment on his loans, and he now finds himself in trouble applying to the state bar:

In January, the committee of New York lawyers that reviews applications for admission to the bar interviewed Mr. Bowman, studied his history and the debt he had amassed, and called his persistence remarkable. It recommended his approval.

But a group of five state appellate judges decided this spring that his student loans were too big and his efforts to repay them too meager for him to be a lawyer.

“Applicant has not made any substantial payments on the loans,” the judges wrote in a terse decision and an unusual rejection of the committee’s recommendation. “Applicant has not presently established the character and general fitness requisite for an attorney and counselor-at-law.”

Mr. Bowman, 47, appears to have crossed some unspoken line with his $400,000 in student debt and penalties, accumulated over many years.

I don't mean to pile on. The article makes clear that the borrower had some extenuating circumstances, and that the lenders don't necessarily have clean hands in all of this. And of course these days even graduates of the top law school in the country are having a tough time finding (and keeping) work at very high salaries.

At the same time, though, one wonders about the borrower's judgment. This article serves as a good reminder that higher education is an investment -- a very expensive one -- and piling on more and more debt means you have to be ruthless in assessing what your income prospects are likely to be coming out of School X with a degree in Y to be leveraged in market Z. And to invest in law school and then have so much trouble passing the bar exam... that's a scary scenario, too.

Some closely related postings on the subject:

• "What's a Master's Degree Worth?"
• "Feast or Famine for Law School Grads"
• "Interview with the LSAT Blog"
• "Upside-Down Math"
• "Dealing with Your Past"

Please share your thoughts! I imagine people will have strong feelings about this NYT article.

I'm enjoying a fascinating blog posting in the NYT about the value of a master's degree. Highly recommended.

A number of economists and education researchers say that the student debt problem, while real, has been overblown by the press and loan-forgiveness advocates, and that most students do not graduate with too much debt

But the debate presents difficult questions for young people, who face the most difficult economy since the Great Depression. Many have decided to go to graduate school, to wait out the storm. Several commenters on our forums even said they had no choice but to seek a master’s degree (and incur more debt), arguing that a B.A. today is the equivalent of having a high school diploma 20 years ago and more employers require a higher degree.

How do students know if a graduate education is worth it or not? What degrees are worth getting, and which are not? How does a student weigh the risks and benefits gain a higher education degree.

Read more here. (But see my advice about the article's purported "pay-off" of going to law school here and here.) And please share your thoughts!

In light of Anna's recent blog entry about good writing (here), I thought I'd chime in and add a little tidbit about good writing as well.

Professor Sherman, a Harvard Law grad and phenomenal teacher, once solemly whispered to me, "You must be willing to kill your babies."

This was in reference to good writing. =)

Over the years, we (the Anna Ivey Team) have helped countless aspiring law students with their personal statements. And I'm shameless at admitting that we're pretty darn effective at drawing out the best writing from their creative minds. It also reminded me of an important piece of advice as people go through the process of applying.

I remember sitting down to read an applicant's personal statement once, only to call her three minutes later and tell her to kill her babies (get rid of some paragraphs). Her writing wasn't bad. However, it wasn't excellent, either.  Like many, many applicants, she had written a personal statement that sounded more like high-minded hosh-posh, proclaiming the meaning of justice and the virtues of law. She had forgotten one thing: her audience. Law school admissions officers, law professors, and even law students probably know more about the subject matter than she could have mustered convincingly on a 2-3 page statement. Knowing your audience is an important element of good writing.

Unless you have geniunely substantive things to say about law or legal practice (e.g. your experience interviewing clients during your internship with the public defender's office), it's generally a good idea to choose a topic you know something about.

Writing a winning personal statement certainly takes time. It also takes flexibility and good judgment to know when to "kill your babies." 

In my role as a law school career advisor, I spend a lot of time discussing job applications with students and assessing resumes and cover letters. Below I list my top five tips for resumes and for cover letters. Later this week I will follow up with tips for interviews and internships. Do you agree with my advice? Do you have other suggestions or are there critical tips I neglected to provide? Please post your tips, too!

Top Five Resume Tips

1. Use action verbs to highlight the transferable skills you have developed. All law schools and legal employers appreciate applicants who can explain how they did the following: edited, drafted, managed, organized, researched, led, persuaded, counseled, taught, assessed, and tutored.

2. Provide detailed content-the key to an effective resume. For example, if you worked as a paralegal, "Conducted legal research, edited briefs, and organized case files" is much more powerful than "Assisted attorneys with case management." In fact, don't use "Assist"-that word is very vague, and can mean anything from "helped attorney write memoranda" to "got coffee for partners."

3. Highlight volunteer activities. These are just as-or more!-meaningful as paid jobs at this stage in many applicants' and students' lives.

4. Value quality over quantity. If possible, demonstrate a long-term commitment to a limited number of meaningful activities (regular volunteer work, leadership roles, increasing responsibility) instead of providing a list of memberships that require no active involvement.

5. Proofread, edit, proofread, edit! Print out your resume for a hard-copy edit, and make sure that at least one other person proofreads it as well.

Top Five Cover Letter Tips

Your cover letter is the first writing sample an employer will see, so thoughtful writing and careful editing are critical. 

1. Explain why you want this job. Do not use a generic letter for which you cut-and-paste the employer's name.

2. Carefully read the employers' job description and website so you can address specifically why you are a strong candidate for the position.

3. Do not repeat your resume by listing all of your prior experiences in paragraph form. Instead, highlight a few experiences and explain how they are relevant to this job application. Provide specific examples to back up your claims of certain skills.

4. Convey confidence but not arrogance.

5. Address the letter to a specific individual if at all possible, rather than "To Whom It May Concern."

See more on cover letters here. 

 

Nicole Vikan is a graduate of NYU Law School. She spent her first law school summer at a large law firm, and her second summer in the Homicide Investigation Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. She returned to the District Attorney's Office after graduation and spent five years as a criminal prosecutor, handling cases such as robbery and assault. Nicole then joined Fordham Law School's Career Planning Center, where she advised students seeking employment in the private and public sectors. She is currently a career counselor at Georgetown Law Center's Office of Public Interest and Community Service. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Nicole works with law school applicants and people exploring legal careers.

For some prospective law school students, the most stressful part of the application process isn't the essay or the LSAT. It's answering a question like this:

Are you currently under indictment, or have you ever been convicted, placed on probation, or given a deferred adjudication or diversion program for a criminal offense? Have you ever been arrested or cited for any criminal violation? If you answered "yes" to any part of the question, please include a separate sheet of paper explaining the circumstances and details of the incident.

That prompt, sometimes called the "disclosure" question in the application, can trigger fear in even the most well-credentialed law school candidate. What about that speeding ticket in high school? Does a fine for drinking in public count? What will it matter if I ignore that thing from college and answer "no"?

There are some important things to know about disclosure of conduct issues and how to answer this type of question.

"What does it matter anyway?"

Law school applications require a signature certifying that the answers provided are "true and complete." They also warn that false, misleading, or incomplete answers may result in sanctions, including suspension, expulsion, or any other form of punishment deemed necessary by the university. But so what? The applications aren't signed under the pains and penalties of perjury. If you lie about a minor criminal matter that happened years ago, who would find out, and what could possibly happen?

The best answer is: it depends. It depends on whether you want to practice law, what you do in your life, and what type of companies and organizations you hope to work with. Below, the impact of the disclosure question is explained in more detail. As you'll read, the answer can affect you long after you are admitted to law school.

Instead of getting nervous and avoiding the issue by lying or omitting something in your applications, here are five rules for answering disclosure questions on your applications.

 

1. Read The Fine Print 

The most frequent mistake made by applicants is not reading the entire question, or seeing the question and just assuming, "Oh, I know what they want here." Questions among applications vary. Some ask for only criminal "convictions," or incidents where you are "sentenced" or given "probation or deferred adjudication." If you were arrested for drinking in public and the case was dismissed when you paid money in court, you were never convicted or sentenced - so you need not disclose that on the application.

Other questions are phrased more broadly by asking about any incident in which you were "arrested, charged, cited, or summonsed" for a "criminal or civil offense." Such broad answers usually trigger disclosure of even the most mundane and inconsequential events (failure to signal, driving with a suspended registration sticker, noise complaints, etc.). Don't guess, and err on the side of disclosure. If you think you are supposed to disclose but aren't sure about the language, consult with someone who can help explain what the phrasing means and how to classify your incident.

 

2. Do Your Research

Few applicants need to have a legitimate concern about their criminal history. In most cases, the incident in question is so minor that admissions committees will pay little or no attention to it. Traffic violations (other than operating under the influence), noise / party violations, or drinking-in-public tickets, for example, are usually not considered significant by admissions committees.

Regardless of the seriousness of the offense, it's worth taking the time now - before you're dealing with a state bar - to order any paperwork you can about your incident. Getting your hands on a copy of the ticket, or criminal docket, or complaint from your case will be extremely helpful when you do apply to a state bar, as these documents are often required as part of your bar application.

Once you've gathered everything relating to the incident, take the time to read it all and identify what happened and what you should call it. If you were charged with something, determine whether it is a "civil" or "criminal" offense. If you accepted responsibility for something, figure out whether you "pled guilty," received a "deferred adjudication" (sometimes called a continuance without a finding, or a "nolo contendere" plea), or just had to pay a fine without making an admission.

If you don't feel confident that you know the proper terminology to describe what happened, don't hesitate to speak to a friend or relative who practices criminal law to help you sort out the details. It's not unreasonable to speak with a criminal attorney to make sure you've got it right. A small consultation expense up front is worth it to avoid aggravation in the future. Whether you do the work yourself or consult with an attorney, make sure you know what you did and what it's called before trying to explain it on a law school application.

If you have been charged with or convicted of something more significant - such as operating under the influence, indecent exposure, assault and battery, a domestic violence complaint, larceny or theft, etc. - calling the state bar where you hope to practice is a good starting point. It's unusual for a prospective attorney to have a criminal history that would disqualify him or her from admission to the state bar, but it's worth asking before you go through the expense and time of applying to law school. In addition, consultation with an attorney after gathering the relevant paperwork is not a bad idea.

 

3. Disclosure Does NOT Always Require Lengthy Self-Reflection

In almost all cases, disclosure requires some additional written material, such as an "addendum" or additional essay discussing the details and circumstances of the incident. The most common mistake made by applicants in these addenda is going overboard.

As a general rule, the more minor and distant the incident, the less is needed. If you stole a candy bar from a general store when you were 11 and received 10 hours of community service, your disclosure should be short and sweet. You don't need to call yourself a juvenile delinquent. If you sprayed graffiti on a wall in high school, explain what happened and acknowledge the mistake, but don't spend pages writing a discourse on the meaning of personal property or the fact that you now know the difference between art and graffiti.

If your incident happened within the last few years, or was more serious than those things mentioned above, it's OK to take a little bit more space to explain the incident. Make sure the details are included - the time and location of the incident, if you were eventually charged or arrested or cited, and the outcome. Still, it is usually not helpful to go into great detail about something that happened in the past.

First, it can sound defensive and disingenuous. Your disclosure should not be a diatribe against unlawful police conduct, or an explanation that amounts to, "Everyone was doing it, but I was the only one who got caught." If you're disclosing what happened, it usually means you were caught and were guilty of doing something wrong.

Second, the more time and space you devote to this essay, the more the admissions committees will read about it. Answer the question without making the issue a major part of your application. If you feel the need to go beyond a brief recitation of the circumstances of the event, make sure to be economical with your words and concentrate on explaining, not defending, your actions. 

 

4. Don't Believe The Hype

There is great confusion about the criminal justice system and how criminal records are kept and disclosed. Many applicants with some incident in their past make the mistake of answering "no" on a disclosure question because they have been misinformed. If a friend, parent, sibling, police officer, or even an attorney has told you that an incident from your past is "sealed" or "expunged," do not assume they are correct. Rather, do the work up front to make sure you know what is and is not going to come out in your law school (or state bar) application process.

Some states automatically "seal" records in certain situations, including juvenile criminal cases. Others require a formal procedure or an application to seal or expunge a criminal record. In some states, there is no such thing as sealing or expunging a criminal record. In a few states, even "sealed" criminal cases show up on a full criminal background check for prosecutors and judges to see in the future. So does the state bar association in your state get to see that record, or some sanitized version of your record?

You may think you know what happens in your state. After all, that incident from when you were a child has been "sealed" for years, so it's not an issue. Even if you think you know because your neighbor's friend's cousin's uncle told you so, are you willing to bet all of the hassles described above on what he said?

The majority of states will allow you to order a copy of your criminal record (adult and juvenile) by submitting a written request and/or applying in person. Take the time to order your materials because the "advice" you got 10 years ago may no longer apply, or it may have been just plain wrong. The consequences of an incorrect disclosure are significant, so don't assume you've been advised correctly.

 

5. It's Usually About The Coverup

The disclosure of a minor criminal or civil violation in an applicant's past will usually not have a negative impact on his prospects for admission. This is especially true for driving offenses and civil infractions that resulted in a fine or community service. An incident involving a felony or dishonesty (fraud, larceny, financial crimes) can have more of an impact; applicants dealing with these issues should consult with their state bar and - if possible - a law school advisor to develop a strategy for dealing with the disclosure question. Finally, disclosure of an incident involving the possession, manufacturing, or distribution of illegal drugs should be treated carefully, since disclosure of narcotics offenses can have an impact on eligibility for financial aid.

 

With all that said, your approach to the disclosure question should focus on the long-range impact of your answer. A large number of state bar associations require submission of your law school application along with your bar materials. Why?

All state bars have what is called a "character and fitness" test which uses, among other things, your written paperwork (sometimes including your law school application) to assess whether you will be an honest member of the state's community of lawyers. These state bar materials are often signed under the pains and penalties of perjury, and almost always include a waiver that authorizes the state bar association to check your criminal record. So what happens if you failed to disclose a minor criminal issue on your law school application but it comes out in the character and fitness section of the bar application?

State bar associations look very unfavorably on inconsistencies and intentional misrepresentation. If you lied to your law school's admissions committee by signing your name and promising to make honest answers - and then lied anyway - how can anything you said in your bar application be trusted? How can you be deemed to have the character and fitness needed to be a member of the bar?

But the problems don't stop there. In some states, a discovery of such an intentional misrepresentation will trigger hearings in front of the board of bar examiners, including a face-to-face interview with the applicant in question. Some applicants consult with lawyers before the hearings, at great personal expense. Others are unprepared for the issue when it comes up in the hearing; after all, why would they warn you about catching you in a lie? And all of this comes at the tail end of a three-year journey that costs time, money, and energy. Oh, and you've just finished taking the bar exam.

It can get worse. State bar associations have close relationships with law schools, especially those found in-state. If an intentional misrepresentation is discovered, it's not unheard of for the bar association to notify the law school from which the applicant graduated. Remember that language from the law school application you filled out more than three years ago - the part that said failure to disclose can result in "...any other form of punishment deemed necessary by the university?" That can include rescinding your degree.

But let's say you failed to disclose an incident that isn't on your criminal record and the state bar never finds out. You pass the character and fitness section. Congratulations! You're a lawyer, and for now your omission has not been uncovered.

Fast forward 10 or 20 years when you have a house, a mortgage, children, and a successful law practice. You're nominated for a judgeship, or a government position, or a place on a sought-after corporate or community board, and the application involves a "full background check" and a review of your bar application (which includes your "disclosure" answer from law school...). Are you still happy with your decision to lie on the law school application?

You get the point. In most cases, your past will not be a hurdle to admission, but a lie or omission today on a law school application can have consequences far down the line.

Questions? Comments? Feel free to post a reply.

 

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Anna Ivey team, Greg works with law school and college applicants.

Read Part 1 of David's story here.

New Venture Challenge: the beginning

All 29 teams chosen to move onto Phase II were required to take the New Venture Challenge (NVC) class. As a law student, I expected this class to be much like John Rodkin's class (at the law school): case studies and 101 on "how to create a pitch deck." But the NVC "class" was far from what I was accustomed to. From day one teams presented before a panel of venture capitalists ("VCs") and entrepreneurs, who were all eager to hear what we (each team) had to present and willing to give us constructive feedback on how to improve our business concepts. And from day one the judges' scoring was taken into account for determining which teams move onto the NVC finals. (YIKES!)

My team, Masala Wala, pitched an Indian quick-service restaurant business. Our idea was a bit odd because the typical VC-backed business is very techy. The only techy thing about Masala Wala (to this day) is our cash register, the ability to place orders over the Internet, and our use of twitter/facebook/blog for marketing.

A long while back in the Fall semester, before the NVC had even started, I had searched out and spoken with a bunch of Chemistry PhDs and engineers to see if we could develop a novel, technology-based "cure" (VC idea) for an evident "pain" (VC problem). Though I came across some REALLY cool technology and ideas, none of them really jived and made my blood rush. But Masala Wala was different - from the moment I heard the business idea, my heart pounded. Having grown up in the restaurant industry (my parents have been in the restaurant business for a very, very long time), I've always sort of secretly harbored dreams of developing the next food empire (like McDonalds). Masala Wala was basically doing for Indian food what Chipotle had done for Mexican food and Panda Express for Chinese food. Given the success of Slumdog Millionaire and the increasing American appreciation for Indian culture and food, it made sense to me logically as well. So I joined teammates Julian, Rohini, Ravi, and Aditya in founding and establishing Masala Wala - Fresh Indian Food!

NVC: the middle

Our first presentation was fairly good - but not entirely impressive. We had 20+ slides and no food to present to our judges. A big part of our shortcoming was lack of time for preparation. Ironically, in the beginning the law students had a much better idea of how to make a successful business presentation than the business school students. This was because all law students participating in the NVC (there were three of us in total) had already passed through John Rodkin's class, and therefore had experience pitching at least one business.

One judge, from Silicon Valley, actually said, "At [UC] Berkeley, we don't allow food concepts into venture capital competitions... Indian food is practically everywhere... I really don't see a new value proposition here." To be honest, we were pissed off by that comment - while giving us the same substantive feedback, he could have been far more kind and constructive. But my teammates and I didn't let our reactions show. We knew that if we were going to win any VCs and skeptics over to our side, we had to take all criticism (even the really ugly kind) with grace.

After the presentation I went up and spoke with the "Berkeley judge," thanked him for his "helpful" feedback, and I asked him about his background. I listened politely until I heard him mention a top Silicon Valley law firm. I told him that I'm a law student and that I have an offer to work for that law firm. He seemed surprised and impressed. I then asked him if he was working with any interesting investment opportunities right now, and we ended up talking for 30 minutes. At the end of the conversation, he gave me his business card and invited me to lunch. =)

My teammates had pegged me as the "networking guy" and put me in charge of marketing. In my mind, our goal during each presentation was to make Masala Wala fanatics out of the judges - the key was to create a buzz. Thus, after each presentation, I made it my priority to go talk to two types of judges: (1) the ones that seemed to LOVE us; and (2) the ones that seemed to HATE us. I didn't care so much about the lukewarm ones because they don't love us enough to invest  much, nor hate us enough to discourage the other judges from investing. The ones that LOVE us had usually loved us from the get-go, so they are easy to work with and make fans out of. But the ones that HATE us, I knew hated the idea, NOT the people. So for the HATERS my motive was to help them see that at the very least, even if this business concept is still less than perfect, the management team is "perfect" and investment-worthy.

Throughout the NVC class, my team made two presentations. By the time our second presentation rolled around, we were experts at making judges believe in our concept. It helped that we had delicious and amazing wraps for the judges to taste-test. We had also consulted many experts, including a vice president of McDonalds and the founders of Homemade Pizza Company. But the real ace in the hole was the amount of work and practical research that my team put into launching our business.

We had shopped for real estate, gone through the four-round hiring process at Chipotle (to learn more about their HR), held numerous taste tests throughout the city, consulted professional chefs to refine our menu, acquired the help of a professional graphics designer to develop our logo, and also sat at numerous restaurants to count checks and foot-traffic. Though I can't list them all, we did plenty more than this.

NVC: the end

A week after my team had made our second presentation, the judges and professors announced the top teams chosen to move onto the finals. By this time, several investors had already expressed interested in our concept and in Masala Wala. But winning this competition meant it would be much easier to convince future investors into giving us money. When we saw our name among the list of finalists,  we only had one week to prepare for the finals, and EVERYTHING had to be perfect: our food, our business plan, and above all, our pitch/presentation.

We met every day for 5-6 hours to run through our pitch and improve our presentation skills. Michael Moyer, a judge who LOVED us, had seen our presentation and offered to help us improve it. Mike encouraged us to make our presentation as close as possible to a theatrical performance. We incorporated humor, movement, facial and hand gestures as well as choreography (where we stand and position ourselves at various points in the presentation).

D-day came Thursday of last week. It started with a continental breakfast and introduction of each of the 30 VCs. And as is typical of business school folks, the event started immediately without any "pomp and circumstance." We were scheduled to present fifth. After watching the first two teams presents, my team left to go cook and prepare our taste-test dish.

BTW, here's some detail about the room layout. The presentation room was shaped in the form of an amphitheater. It had three huge screens in front of the room, as well as a small flat screen TV monitor facing the presenters, so that the presenters can see what is being projected on the three large screens behind them. The business school had prepared a "spill out" room with a live feed for those students and observers who couldn't fit into the presentation room.

It took my team an hour to prepare 48 taste-test wraps. We were fortunate to be scheduled as the fifth team, since we would be up right before lunch. When the clock struck 11:15, my team swarmed into the presentation room with our taste-test wraps. We gave wraps to each of the judges, distinguished guests, and faculty. Any leftovers went to students and audience members.

Our presentation began soon after we served our food. It went well. Everyone laughed at our jokes and responded well to our gestures. I came out thinking that we had a decent shot at winning first place. While other teams were making the usual techy presentations, we had a fun-factor to our Indian food.

After our presentation, my team sat through five other presentations. After the last team presented, the judges had the results in hand within 30 minutes. During the cocktail reception, where the winners were to be announced, a judge approached me and said, "You'll be pleasantly surprised!" I was convinced that we'd be in first place.

"The third place winner.... Masala Wala!" I was shocked. Though I smiled throughout the handshaking, award receiving, and picture taking process, I was still shaken by the fact that we weren't first place. Third place is good, and I have no qualms about that. But in some ways, to get to where we were already, it was necessary to believe in our concept whole-heartedly. And believing something whole-heartedly means that we had to believe it to be number one.

My team is now $7000 richer. We decided to reinvest the prize money into the company. The next step is to secure more financing/investment from the fans we garnered through this process. =)
Keep your fingers crossed for us!

[David sent me this just after he had finished packing. He is now on the road, heading out to Silicon Valley for the summer. Good luck, David! - Anna]

 

David Yi attended Middlebury College and graduated with a degree in Political Science and Chinese. A Peace Corps volunteer in the People's Republic of China, he also acquired extensive experience teaching and training college and post-college level students in China and Korea. David then returned to the United States, where he founded oneAsia, a non-profit organization committed to encouraging unity and volunteerism among Asian nations. He soon had two jobs: running a non-profit by day and teaching the LSAT by night. David is currently a 2L at the University of Chicago Law School and works with law school applicants as part of the Ivey Consulting team.

Just two weeks ago (a Tuesday to be exact), I was in my law school class, constantly stealing glances at my computer screen to check if there were any new messages. I was anxious.

"Any news?" I typed, then clicked send.

"Nope, not yet."  Rohini replied within seconds.

Rohini and I are part of a five-person team. Earlier in the Spring Quarter, we had decided to participate in a venture capital competition sponsored by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business - the "New Venture Challenge" (NVC).

"I just got asked how we spell our company name. That might mean we're in…?" Rohini was hanging out near the Polsky Center, where the judges were finalizing their results; she too was obviously anxious.

The suspense was driving me crazy, so I turned off my laptop, and tried to keep my mind focused on my law professor. I didn't turn on my computer again, until after class. When I open my email inbox, I found a message from Ravi (another team member): "WE'RE A FINALIST!"

Business Plan Competitions

Practically every big name business school in the nation hosts some form of annual business plan competition. Hundreds (perhaps thousands) of entrepreneurially minded students from all walks and disciplines submit their ideas in hopes to get a chance to stand before venture capitalists, who may invest in their ideas and help them realize their dreams.

Some of the representative business competitions out there, by region, are:

West Coast
E-Challenge: Stanford's Business Plan Competition (see here)
UC Berkeley Business Plan Competition (see here)

East Coast
Harvard's Business Plan Contest (see here)
MIT Entrepreneurship Competition (see here)

The South
Moot Corp Competition McCombs School of Business (UT) (see here)

The Midwest
New Venture Challenge (NVC) (see here)

NVC Selection Process

There are essentially three levels in NVC: Phase I, Phase II, and Final Round.

During Phase I, hundreds of entrepreneurs from all across the nation submit a feasibility summary (basically, a brief summary describing the business concept, financials, and management) to the business school. 29 teams are selected to move onto Phase II.

During Phase II, the selected teams have the opportunity to create their business plan (a document introducing the business concept, marketing strategy, management team, and financial milestones) and practice pitching their slide decks before a panel of venture capitalists. Based on the business plan and pitch, 10 teams are selected to move onto the Final Round.

During the Final Round, selected teams submit their business plans and pitch their ideas to 30 high profile venture capitalists. One winner is chosen. The winner gets a cash prize. But the real prize is the glory that follows from winning and the invaluable investment relationships built throughout the process.

But it’s probably best to think of the competition as something akin to American Idol. There is only one winner, but many participants, especially those in the Final Round, get noticed and "picked up" by some investor. In short, just because a team doesn't win, doesn't mean it won't get financed; many losing teams from the past are now extremely successful businesses.

The Beginning of NVC

My team consists of 3 MBAs and 2 JDs. It's quite an amazing bunch. Collectively the team has experience in virtually every single industry imaginable (e.g., i-banking, IT consulting, law, restaurant management, etc.)

I personally have no background in finance or economics. But long before attending law school, I was fascinated with venture capital ("VC") financing. Venture capitalists ("VCs") basically invest in ideas. An entrepreneur who approaches VCs needs to convince them that his/her business plan (a.k.a. the idea) is worth the VCs’ time (~5 years) and money (millions of dollars).  The thought of being funded to realize an idea as well as investing in the next brilliant idea (not stocks, bonds or real property) is so exciting to me.

Because of that long-standing interest, naturally, during the beginning of my 2L year, I took a law school course called "Entrepreneurship in Practice" with John Rodkin. The class was basically a course on how to successfully obtain venture financing. As an experienced entrepreneur and venture capitalist, John made a point to help us experience the VC world by running through case studies. These case studies often forced us to role play and act as either the entrepreneur's lawyer or as the VC. The final exam was to conceive a business, draft a business plan, and present the business.

After my classmates and I finished presenting our businesses, John encouraged us submit our business plans to NVC. That was the beginning of my NVC journey.

What is a Business Plan?

A business plan is basically the blueprint of the business. The objective is to draft a persuasive and easy-to-read document that will convince anyone reading the plan to agree that the idea proposed in the plan is a sure winner.

But the process of drafting a good business plan is long and arduous. First, for my "Entrepreneurship in Practice" final exam, my teammate and I had to find a venture-finance worthy business proposal. Most VCs invest only in easily scalable business models that will bring huge returns in fewer than five years (e.g., Google, Facebook). After bouncing ideas back and forth, we eventually found an entrepreneur in Florida who had developed "Peelable Paint." Although I can't discuss the details due to privacy concerns, suffice it to say that my teammate and I were convinced that this cutting-edge paint would have any VC going gaga.

Now that we had an idea, we had to create our pitch deck (= PowerPoint presentation). Writing a great business plan is a lot like drafting a great legal brief: the writing has to be clear, concise, persuasive, and to the point. The process of creating a pitch deck forces people to focus and clarify their thoughts. Guy Kawasaki, a VC godfather, preaches the 10-20-30 strategy for creating a successful pitch deck:

1. No more than 10 slides;
2. No presentation more than 20 minutes; and
3. No font smaller than size 30.

My teammate and I faithfully followed Kawasaki's advice. The most difficult aspect, for me, was creating financial projections: cash trough, earnings, growth in EBITDA, etc. This is where it helped to have an MBA teammate.  

After creating the pitch deck, we finally got down to writing our business plan. We stayed up many a night - one night we worked 20 hours straight - drafting the "perfect" business plan.

To make the long story short, we received very high marks on our final exam. My teammate eventually submitted the business plan to Tuft's business plan competition, where it won a cash prize.

Tune in for Part II tomorrow! Please share your comments, reactions, and experiences.

David Yi attended Middlebury College and graduated with a degree in Political Science and Chinese. A Peace Corps volunteer in the People's Republic of China, he also acquired extensive experience teaching and training college and post-college level students in China and Korea. David then returned to the United States, where he founded oneAsia, a non-profit organization committed to encouraging unity and volunteerism among Asian nations. He soon had two jobs: running a non-profit by day and teaching the LSAT by night. David is currently a 2L at the University of Chicago Law School and works with law school applicants as part of the Ivey Consulting team.

There's a nice collection of articles in today's WSJ for aspiring lawyers and JD/MBAs:

Creating a Shorter Path to a JD/MBA: This is a good discussion of the pros and cons of the 3-year joint degree. I would add that the 3-year program is too short unless you have a fair amount of work experience and very targeted goals for the joint program (and what comes after). You would need to hit the ground running as soon as you get there, and be very smart about mapping out those three years and the summers in between. Most law school applicants and many business school applicants I cross paths with don't have that much focus yet. They are going to graduate school to figure out what they want to do with themselves, and they are not really the ones who would benefit from the fast-track joint degree.

Law Firms Embrace Business School 101: Law firms are realizing that their attorneys lack management and business training and are therefore sending them to executive ed classes at business schools ("We realized our associates don't have an inside view of how our clients work").

Lawyers Often Lack the Skills Needed to Draw, Keep Clients: They don't teach you business development or client relations in law school, and I often remind law school applicants who tell me they're "not interested in business" that at a minimum, if they hope to advance as lawyers and own an equity stake in a law firm one day (whether at a large firm or as solo practitioners), they will have to learn how to think like business owners and learn how to run a business.

Hand in hand with client relations, it's also important for young attorneys to learn how to interact appropriately with more senior associates and law firm partners. Here's a recent example, in the form of an email exchange, of a junior law firm associate who needs to learn those skills (tone, content, spelling, judgment). It's a good reminder that going to a top law school is not the same thing as knowing how to succeed in the working world.

Thoughts? Comments? Please share.

LSAT tutor and blogger Steve Schwartz sends me this intriguing email. Check out his series of postings.

Hi Anna,

Hope you've been well.

I just published a series of posts about LSAC.

In this series, I report on the fact that certain LSAT PrepTests are only available to students who take prep courses. These exams are not available to students who choose to self-study.

The series includes excerpts of email and phone conversations with LSAC representatives, as well as emails from prep companies, verifying this.

There are five posts in the series, all of which I just published:

1. The Case of the Secret LSAT PrepTests

2. Official LSAT PrepTest February 1997

3. Cost of LSAT PrepTests | Self-Study vs. Course

4. LSAC's PrepTest Licensing Policy

5. Suggestions for LSAC on Restructuring LSAT PrepTest Sales

 

Could you tell me if schools gives applicants time to visit if they are admitted from the waitlist or hold category? Also, when do they make this decision?

Some schools give an option to visit (or at least give you a little time to decide), while others will give you only a short window to accept or decline the offer. The latter is more likely; if you were admitted off the waitlist, you may be told that you have a week (or less) to decide because they need to know whether to offer the position to someone else on the waitlist. In short, I would not bank on having time to set up a formal visit.

In terms of timing, there’s no way to predict that, because it all depends on how few or how many people who have already put down deposits decide to withdraw over the course of the summer (either because they themselves have been admitted from waitlists at other schools, their plans change, or they just fail to show up at orientation). That's called the "summer melt." I’ve known students to be admitted from a waitlist as late as August and even during orientation in September.

My suggestion is to put down the initial deposit at your top choice and then if you are admitted elsewhere and want to make the switch, all you’ve lost is the deposit. Just be sure you read the fine print on the letter of acceptance and/or letter for the deposit to make sure they aren’t asking you to withdraw your applications at other school (in which case, you can't stay on wailtists elsewhere). More on that below.

 

Say that next month I am admitted from a waitlist at School X. Can I still remain on other waitlists?

Waitlists are very odd, and there’s no way to predict if or when you’ll be admitted from one of them. Chances are relatively low, in fact, so I don’t think you’ll be faced with acceptances from more than one waitlist. That said, if you are accepted at School X, you will send in a deposit to secure your spot in the class. If, at some point after that, you are admitted to School Y, the “loss” to you of accepting the later School Y offer is the deposit you have at School X.

Many schools take deposits in stages, and follow-up deposits will typically be larger than the initial deposit. At some point you may be asked to send in your first tuition check (typically before classes start). In that situation, the “loss” to you would increase since you’d have more money invested in School X.

One caveat to this (and it’s an important one): read the fine print when you send in admissions deposits to make sure the school isn’t saying, “By sending us this $ you are promising to withdraw from all other waitlists.” In many cases, if a school is offering you a spot off a waitlist, then they are under the impression that you are committed to that school. That will vary by school, so read the language and/or listen to any communications you have with the schools.

 

I am on multiple waitlists. I don’t want to commit to my genuine number one choice, get rejected, and then not get into to my second choice because I didn’t make as strong a declaration of interest or intent to accept Is a declaration of intent binding? If it is unlikely that I would be admitted from more than one waitlist, would it be OK to send a declaration of intent to more than one school?

I understand your issue with writing to one school, getting rejected, and not getting into a second choice. There is no formal policy saying that a letter of continued interest in which you “pledge” to attend is binding. That said, the process requires honesty from everyone—applicants, admissions people, etc. You can certainly write to multiple schools and express “strong” interest in remaining on the waitlist to be admitted (or some other phrasing), but you should definitely not make a “pledge” (or anything that could be construed that way) to more than one school.

 

I want to send a "pledge" letter to a school that waitlisted me. How do I phrase it? What does pledging mean for me and the school? Can it ever hurt my chances of admission?

A letter of interest (or email) in which you "pledge" to attend a school if admitted from its waitlist is fine. Generally, people say something along the lines of: “If offered a place in the class, I would definitely accept” or “if admitted, I would definitely attend.” There is no formulaic answer or phrasing needed.

Pledging won’t hurt you. It is used to signal to the school that you will have a positive impact on its yield (the percentage of admitted applicants who accept a school's offer). That is, you’re telling the school that if it offers you a spot, you’ll help the school's overall yield by definitely accepting the offer. For the school, it’s a signal—a message indicating that it will not be wasting an offer (and take a hit to its yield) if it extends one to you from the waitlist.

There is no formal policy saying that a letter of continued interest (or email) in which you pledge to attend is binding. That said, you should definitely not make a pledge (or anything that could be construed that way) to more than one school.

 

I'm planning a trip to a school where I'm waitlisted. Is this a good idea? If they let me visit, is there anything I need to do?

There's no reason for them to not “let you” visit; in fact, you can visit whenever you’d like. Whether you get to speak to someone in admissions is a different story, but at the very least you can visit and see what’s what.

If you get a chance to speak with someone from admissions, make sure to introduce yourself clearly so he/she knows your name. You'll need to show specific (rather than generic) interest in the school and emphasize your fit. You can also use that opportunity to update them on any developments or more recent accomplishments.

School visits can be helpful to you in identifying what you like (and dislike) about a particular place, but don't expect that a visit will cause you to be removed from the waitlist and rewarded with an offer of admission. While you can make an impression on admissions representatives during your visit, there's no guarantee that the school will take anyone from the waitlist.

Still, visits can make an impression about the sincerity of your interest in the school, and they also help you in your own planning. If you haven't visited the school before, it can be hard to decide, on the spot, whether to accept a waitlist offer or not (particularly if a given waitlist school is not your obvious first choice). The more you know about the school before accepting, the better.

As an aside: If you can't visit, it's still a good idea to emphasizefit and update them about any developments in a LOCI (a letter ofcontinued interest, which you should be sending them about once amonth). If you've already included those pieces of information inprevious communications, it's fine simply to say that you're still veryinterested in remaining on the waitlist and thanking them for theircontinued consideration of your application.

 

Do you have any tips or feedback from your own waitlist experiences? Please share in a comment. You can find more waitlist advice in a previous posting here.

 

Gregory Henning is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Judge R. Lanier Anderson of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then became an Assistant District Attorney in Boston. As part of the Anna Ivey team, works primarily with law school applicants.