|
Ok so this question might be hard to quantify. I am about to apply to law schools (probably too many at once but hey) and I have some questions that are entirely subjective. With the general public catching on to what is frankly the reality of law school and associated risks do you think that makes it harder or easier to get in to a school that in 2005 would have been impossible for all but the most outstanding students? Put another way: with less people applying and attending law school do you think that drop off is coming from students at the top or students from the bottom? I'm trying to quantify average LSATs and GPA numbers for schools and all the figures I feel I can rely on are from 2010 or earlier. I'm trying to see if I need to adjust the numbers slightly and if so which way. I ask because there are a number of schools I'm well-qualified for in T1 but the majority of the T14 would be fairly unrealistic for me and while it's nice to dream I don't want to just waste the application money. I can provide "my numbers" if it helps but my question really applies to anyone.
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
That's helpful, thanks. Second question that applies to me but I'd imagine is general enough to be helpful to everyone. How much (or little) does work experience help an application? I have been working full-time in one job for the 3.5 years since I graduated in May 2010. The job is not law related but it is internationally flavored and relatively respected (I'm a travel agent). Obviously every student and school are different, but how much should I emphasize my work experience in interviews or essays? Do schools have some sort of adjustment they do to their relative median numbers with regards to people who have been out of school for a while? I have heard it "helps" which makes sense, I just have no idea how much.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 10:12
|
|
|
TenementFunster posted:I think the real surprise here is that a recent graduate found a job as a travel agent. how do those still exist, and can you explain your apparent attraction to deeply troubled occupations? I'm old fashioned? To answer the question honestly I had always known that if grad school or future education was in my future it would be law school. I have a good mind for it and enjoy the realities of law. But I graduated in 2010 and thought that grad school then was just hiding from the real world, at least for me. I wanted to explore for a bit and hold off making a decision until I knew it was the right move. I've had my fun but I don't think I have the tools to really make any sort of mark in the world and I'm about ready to murder some of my clients so I need to move on. Frankly I still don't know if it's "right" but in the grand scheme of things applying is a small cost and there's nothing forcing me to say yes to any school. Honestly while I have traveled pretty extensively (more than most my age) my current job really was a happy coincidence. The realities of the travel industry mean you have to specialize in a type or "brand" of travel and just nail those discounts to make you worth it over Expedia or something. There is always a cadre of people who are too lazy or confused to book their own travel but to actually make money you have to do something that people just can't do on their own. As an aside, it's pretty difficult to come into the lawyer and law school thread and actually be able to say with truth that you are in an even more troubled industry than law. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:Get the best of both worlds and work for Lawyers Travel, booking callback for hundreds of stressed out 2Ls. If one of your selling points is that you know not to book people in bulkhead seats (which you have to pay more for anyway, meaning it would be a conscious choice on the part of the passenger) you should probably find another company to work for.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
All very helpful thank you. A question for those "in the know." It seems like Cooley is uniformly the school used for punchlines. Are they really that much worse than other T3 schools? Not to say I'm considering them but I got a mailer and while they didn't seem elite by any means they didn't seem to be incompetent.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Fair enough. What are everyone's opinions on Minnesota-Twin Cities? It's always ranked in the top 25 but barring the low cost of living in Minneapolis I can't see any reason given on why to go there instead of say Wisconsin. I mean aside from their mascot being the Fighting Mondales obviously.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Also very helpful, thanks so much. I realized today that Scott Walker's attitude towards education funding is reason enough to not apply to Wisconsin. One final question for now. I'm at the point with my "numbers" where I will make a good showing applying to schools ranked around 20-40, I'd say getting into half the schools I apply to is realistic. My question is whether it would be worth it to apply to a few choice schools in the T14 just as a "why not." I know I'll be applying to Berkeley since it's my state school (but not UCLA since I work on the Westside in LA and frankly I'm sick of it). I'm thinking of applying to Northwestern because they give interviews to anyone who applies and wants one which is helpful. Finally two weeks ago I received an e-mail from Harvard Law telling me to consider them with links and all that from their Dean of Admissions. Now my numbers would normally be far too low for Harvard and I have no idea what to make of it. Is it worth it to spend $80 to apply? If nothing else it would be a super nice rejection letter.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2013 08:20
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:It doesn't mean anything. Law schools have an incentive to reject as many applicants as possible, because doing so increases their selectivity for rankings purposes. Which is what I thought, but does a school like Harvard really have any problem finding enough hopelessly unqualified applicants to deny without e-mailing some dude in Los Angeles?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2013 08:52
|
|
|
What are everyone's thoughts on George Washington Law? I'm right in its wheelhouse for accepted students as far as numbers and things but it honestly seems like just a massive JD factory with disinterested professors and employment office. Does its reputation make it worth it? Am I way off base?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:What about its reputation is positive? Are you sure you're not thinking of the former President's reputation? Well it's got a high ranking and does reasonably well with it's internship placement. But that's just it, it's not like anything about it stands out to me as being that great a program aside from it being in Washington DC.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:youve clearly done your homework, dont listen to these dreamcrushers We all seem to be saying the same thing, not worth the time the application would take. Some are just saying it more enthusiastically. Thanks for the insights everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
Zarkov Cortez posted:Their stories aren't as interesting. Lower likelihood of halitosis.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
insanityv2 posted:oh jesus i miss california. Aside from being worse in every measurable way?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
What are people's thoughts on William and Mary Law? Unbelievable I already heard from them and was admitted to their incoming class this morning. And before people bring it up, I grew up in New Hampshire so a tiny rural school isn't a big deal.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:Everything we told you about GW Law 2 weeks ago applies equally to any other middling tier 1 school you're going to breathlessly ask us about I never said I was excited to go, I just said I heard about it this morning which is remarkable since I only sent in the application 2 months ago. I have a job I'm pretty good at and get paid ok money this very second, I will likely have another offer in a few weeks to move up in the company. I don't NEED to go to law school and will only go if the circumstances are right. I'm not a 22 year old doofus who is panicked about job prospects. For what it's worth I am NOT a fan of GWLaw, I was just talking with a friend and it came up and he seemed surprised that I mentioned it was a crummy diploma mills. For all the faults of law schools everywhere that William and Mary isn't exempt from it's problems stem from realities in the legal field and it's mid 1st tier ranking. GW has problems unique to GW. I'm trying to get some feedback from everyone so I can make the best decision I can. Yours is succinct and to the point. My understanding was this board was the go-to A/T for current and prospective lawyers/students to share advice but everyone is so bitter that it's impossible to just get answers that I can build with. Which objectively might be the best evidence there is to not go to law school. Pook Good Mook fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Oct 31, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Ok here's a constructive question law goons. To your knowledge, what are the best schools/programs for election law in the country? Pretty much every decent school has an election law elective or two, but are there any that stand out? Is anyone on the board actually doing election law?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
When he says the "worst is yet to come for legal education" he means in regards to the health of schools' programs right? Because this trend is not even close to a bad thing.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
Roger_Mudd posted:Assuming that each student represents $100,000 in revenue to the school (which I think is low), that represents 1.4 billion in lost revenue or a decline of 27% in market revenue from 2010 to 2014. Well there was a discussion a few pages ago saying that by and large the drop off in applicants has been larger from the high end of the applicant pool. The top schools will all stay open based on name and endowment but this will probably affect Tier 2 schools hardest because now their normal applicants are being let in in the higher schools and the crap applicants still won't make it out of Cooley.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Tokelau All Star posted:Ugh, I am knee deep in the poo poo with this foreclosure defense case. The client keeps calling and sending articles from this Neil Garfield dude and wanting us to tailor our defense to his theories. Here's his wonderful website! http://livinglies.wordpress.com/ Midway down the first screen: "Educate yourself and your lawyer" Is this guy a friend of your boss or something?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 08:13
|
|
|
nm posted:Holy crap, PD offices are hiring like crazy in CA right now. San Diego County just hired 20 people or something insane. California balanced its budget for the first time in decades. Time to immediately unbalance that poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
Question about law school goons. What are the thoughts on Iowa? It's ranked 26 in the country so not terrific in the grand scheme of things and it's very Midwest on its employment statistics so I'm aware if its weaknesses. That said, this morning I found out they were giving me a full ride scholarship in return for 10 hours per week of work in 2L and 3L.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
At least he'll have more exciting business cards.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
WaveLength posted:
Congrats! And since you seem to already live in Montreal you're already accustomed to the worst part about McGill so good news all around.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 23:02
|
|
post
|
HiddenReplaced posted:What the hell, bro!? You got a problem with Montreal? Poutine supremacy. Montreal is amazing. Too bad it's filled with Quebecois. I say that as someone with family there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 09:34
|
|
|
Adar posted:With an LLM at a prestigious school already, whatever an SJD gives you isn't going to be worth a PhD, IMO - at least in the US, barely anyone knows what an SJD even is. I'm sure a hiring committee will, but I don't see anybody valuing it as highly as a PhD from Oxbridge. Santorum's Catholic. Born-agains hate Catholics.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:It occurred to me that even if Romney had won, I'm not sure I'd see him packing the federal government with Regent U Law grads like GW Bush. It seemed like that administration valued rigid adherence to ideology a lot more than most others, GOP or Democratic, over any consideration of competence. Well, Ted Cruz is a douchebag. But I agree, Romney would have filled up the justice department with silver spoons from Harvard and Yale.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:I was talking with someone about an air traffic controller job. She said she had two close friends who were, and that they said it was in fact quite brutal (in the first 5-10 years in particular), because scheduling is very strange. Apparently, you work this bizarre schedule where you don't just work a normal 8 hour day at the same time. Instead, your work shift creeps backward or forward each day (so that you might start at 8:00 a.m. the first day of the week, 5:00 a.m. the next day, 2:00 a.m. the day after that, etc.). I think people calling it "easy" are underestimating the type of work you do. In law you might have a desk and inbox full of garbage and while it will take you forever to get through everything you can at least prioritize and some items are less urgent than others. In ATC everything that comes at you has a time limit and it's essential to keep hundreds of flights and bits of data separate and accounted for or people could literally be killed. It's the type of work and the worker you might be that makes it "easy." If you are a data minded person and don't mind when information never stops coming at you then you'll love ATC. If not you'll probably be burned out pretty quick. It's certainly not for everyone and its irresponsible to assume that someone who feels their strengths are law/law school would suddenly make a good ATC.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
sullat posted:In that case, it'd be to the American taxpayer. If they're the ones ultimately on the hook. But think of how much our society is improved by all those lawyers! If you think about it, we're all coming out ahead.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:Yes, any system where American tax payers help fund outsized law school tuition and banks is A-OK by me. gently caress feeding the poor, I want my tax dollars going to law school professors. Apparently my sarcasm didn't quite translate. Teach me for not using an emoticon.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Also alongside the medical field the ABA is one of the most effective lobbying groups there is. IBR isn't going anywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:That's not true. Yep. If you're looking for work and can't find it then you would count in the U3 statistics. How you got to the point of not having a job is irrelevant.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:The other thing about being someone with a high LSAT / low GPA is that you absolutely have to kill it your first semester. Like, everyone should work their rear end off and kill it first semester, but high LSAT / low GPA usually means you were lazy or took classes from a lovely major in undergrad, which means you're really at risk for repeating that. You have the potential to do better, as your LSAT shows, but you have to be really careful and sure that you'll avoid the same pattern of behavior that got you in hot soup the first time. Plus nobody gives a poo poo about your LSAT score after you start lawschool, so you no longer have a leg up on folks. I'm a little confused as to what difference this would make. Is this for the person looking to transfer or are you referring to perhaps being given a scholarship by your current school after the first semester?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Honest no snark question: What if he wants to work in government job? Not necessarily a federal prosecutor job or some other federal position that's still super competitive, maybe his goal is to be an assistant DA for Nassau county or something. If you've got a reasonable 10-year period before your loans are forgiven (and let's be real, 10 years might be a best case scenario for some graduates in non-governmental positions) is UCLA still a bad choice? Even if his plans are to move back East wouldn't an average graduate from UCLA look better than an average graduate of Cardozo?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
CaptainScraps posted:DA Positions are super competitive nowadays. Well then to my point, if that's your ideal wouldn't UCLA still be a better option?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Evil Weasel you put the point I was going to make much better than I ever could. I'm only going to add that Google is a business (like cooking, art, writing) where you have a body of work that you can present to the hiring committee or interviewer to show what you're capable of. You might be an autistic mute who never got an A on anything harder than a spelling test but if you can figure out how to get a browser to go just .5 seconds faster loading Wikipedia using previously untried methods you can get hired. That's why Google gives most of its programmers coding tests that are much more important to them than GPA or school prestige. An equivalent example (and we're only talking about new hires, not transfers) would be if a law firm just doled out civil cases or something to each of its prospective hires and then told them to just go for it. No firm is going to do that so they have to hire based on the only tangible things they have which is what school you went to and what you did there (including externships, clinics, etc). evilweasel posted:
It's been my experience that no company could possibly be worse off not having an HR department.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
nm posted:Life as a public defender: So basically every episode of Cops ever then?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:Boo, per the student loan thread the student loan changes won't be retroactive, assuming the proposal becomes law. Even so it'll debilitate public interest law in the long run. Unfortunately it's probably the best thing they could do to force law schools to change the way they do business.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:This is not even close to being the best thing they could do. I doubt many of the students still choosing to attend law school do so because of that specific program. I didn't mean in the sense that it will stop even 5% of potential students from starting law school. I was thinking it will put a strain on government hiring, particularly state and local governments. Which will in turn cause them to work with their local schools to make them lower costs so they can actually hire competent people for government positions. At least you'd think so. Some public schools are already slowly moving in that direction. I don't think you can change the costs of the truly top tier schools unless the government stops guaranteeing all loans.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:The government will have no problem hiring people. There is an incredible demand for government jobs, and this demand will persist even without this program. The government has its pick of competent people for the foreseeable future. If competent people are all going to T-1 schools and are 150,000 how could they take a government job if there isn't a mechanism in place to make their loan repayment comparable to high paying firm jobs?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
Someone should really edit the 4 year old OP to say what someone said a page ago, "Only go to law school planning to transfer if you would be OK getting a degree from your first school." That's the most succinct and helpful way I've ever heard it put.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 18:34
|
|