Hey guys,
Could you please explain me what's the point of taking into account a size of LL.M class while chosing a law school to attend?

All LL.M students are required to take only two mandatory classes together (which is also not always true for some programs). That's it! All other classes the LL.M students take with 1L,2L or 3L JD students. The LL.M's are graded on curve together with JD students who're in the same class. If one choses to attend a 1L class, he/she will be in a
200-300-student class. If a 2L or a 3L class is chosen, you will most likely find yourself in a 20-50-student class.
Neither your grades, nor your performance depends on the size of LL.M class. In my opinion, what matters is the size of a class for a particular course chosen.

Am I missing something?

I can imagine that the size of the LL.M. class might be relevant to those who believe that:
- a smaller class reflects greater selectivity, hence increasing the reputation of the university;
- a smaller class helps members of the class getting to know each other quicker and better.

As far as I am concerned, I don't think that the size of the class necessarily reflects the selectivity, and I believe that if you compare, for example, two extremes such as the 10 students in the Stanford's LL.M. in corporate governance and the 200 students in Harvard's LL.M., there might be a better chance to get a more enriching experience when having the opportunity to meet 200 people from around the world, rather than just 10-20. But I know other persons may well think differently.

Just a quick note:

In some schools (e.g. Chicago) size of the LLM reflects size of JD enrollment, hence there are no classes with 200 students, but all classes (1L, 2L, 3L) are quite small. Could be an advantage, except if you want to meet 200 persons from all over the world. I just wonder if you will really get to know 200 persons..... I doubt it!

I can tell you why I am interested in a smaller program: in most cases your chances of getting to know the professors is better in a small program. If there are 200 students that arrive in an LL.M program every year, the chance that a professor will take the time to get to know them all is quite slim. The size of a class may also indicate your chance of getting in to the JSD program, if this is what you ultimately want. It doesn't necessarily work that way (Chicago is a good example of a school where this rule is not true).

Small programs are not commercial, and I think they are more selective.

Nazli, I'm not sure what you mean by "commercial". After all, most of the LL.M. porgrams entitle the LL.M. students to attend the same courses as the JDs. So is HLS "commercial", for example, in your eyes? Then it would also be true for their JD program? Also, the size of the LL.M. is not always a good estimate of how selective they are. I think we can all say that HLS is more selective than Chicago, for example (but I might be wrong and others could think differently, of course); however, the size of its LL.M. program is 4 times the size of Chicago's!

Considering the price we have to pay, they are all commercial in my mind and not purely meant to satisfy your brain (unless you're very idealistic)...

It's just a question of perspective and of taste. With a big LLM class such as Harvard, Columbia or even more NYU, you get the opportunities to meet a lot of people and you will have a good alumni network (I still don't know what the importance of these alumni are, we'll see in a few years :) ).

In smaller classes such as Stanford, Yale or Chicago (and Michigan I think), you will probably get a closer relation with your fellows. However, even in big LLM's, I'm sure you quickly always go out with the same group of people (we all know that from our own experience in our countries). So it's probably not too much of a difference on that side.

The main difference for me is the fact that you get closer to your Professors in a small class, they can pay more attention to each student and the exchange is much easier (everybody knows everyone), thus creating a feeling of family. At least for me, it's also much easier to take a word in front of 20 people than 100 pairs of clever eyes staring at you...

But it really is first of all a question of taste. Anyway, whether in a small or big class, you will first learn things on your own thanks to your work; whatever and how good the Law School is, Professors won't learn for you. You're the one who decides what you will gain from this year :)

I haven't really expected this reaction. I didn't mean commercial in that way, and for sure I didn't mean Harvard. I believe that people started to get each other too wrong in this forum. So, I will try to write less from now on...

Sorry, I didn't mean to be agressive, Nazli! Please don't leave the forum beacuse of my reaction which, when reading it again, I realize might sound agressive, but really was not meant to at all...

Sorry again... ;-)

I didn't get ricklo's message as agressive, and I surely didn't mean to be agressive at all either. I also feel very sorry Nazli if you got it that way, that was not at all intended...

Thanks for your kindness Ricklo, maybe I'm too sensitive :)Good luck in Harvard!

Dear Nazli,

To make you feel better I will tell you about my own calculations and estimates on the selectivity of schools. It really does turn out that Chicago is more selective than HLS: in Chicago its about 14 people per place in the LLM. Program, whereas in HLS it is about 10-11 people per place. Of course some people may comment that the level of the pool of applicants also matters but I assume that most of the people who apply to HLS also apply to Chicago.
However, from my personal point of view there is a very strong advantage in a large LL.M Program apart from getting the great alumni network. If you look at it at a different angel you will see that it is a big challenge to learn to study on your own. I think that it is really important in normal life, as you will be missing all of the teachers as soon as you start to practice. It is essential to be able to understand information without anyones comments and interpretation. I really do find that kind of experience really rewarding. The less help you are able to get, the better you are able to do on your own.

Hi Bitsou,
I see that you know a lot about law schools, so may I ask you sth.? Do you think Chicago is too academic like Yale? I mean, do you think Chicago is not suitable for a business lawyer who would like to be in law practice? (I've heard some comments that it's more academic than other law schools, and I wonder if that's true. I know that it has a great faculty and rich academic environment, but it does not necessarily mean that their graduates can only become scholars right?)
By the way which one would you choose: Chicago or Virginia? :)
Thanks a lot!
Nazli

Sorry, I wanted to send the last post directly to Bitsou...

That's an interesting point of view Matreshka, I'll think about it, thanks :)

Hello Nazli,
I would choose Chicago over Virginia without any hesitation actually. No, as far as I know, Chicago is a very good Law Schools for practitionners as well. Richard Posner who's the father of the economic analysis of the law was first of all a Judge at the Court of appeals, not a full-time Professor (it may have changed now). You make a very good choice by going to Chicago.

Richard Posner (and his son) are both still in!