ABA actually warns against law school

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby 09042014 » Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:53 pm

saito816 wrote:
MrAnon wrote:
I think its worth mentioning being a URM with an Ivy law degree will still open doors. Many of them. Especially if black.


To a limited extent, but URMs outside of the T3 have difficulty finding jobs. URMs at the bottom of the T14 might talk to your average grad of a T50 to understand what the job search will be like.


I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly, are you trying to say that unless you are in the T3, being a URM is such a negative soft that attending a t14 school is the equivalent of being white and attending a T50 :roll: , or are you saying that being at the bottom third at a T14 as a URM is the equivalent of an average person attending a T50


Clearly the later.

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Aqualibrium » Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:58 pm

MrAnon wrote:
I think its worth mentioning being a URM with an Ivy law degree will still open doors. Many of them. Especially if black.


To a limited extent, but URMs outside of the T3 have difficulty finding jobs. URMs at the bottom of the T14 might talk to your average grad of a T50 to understand what the job search will be like.



edit: someone beat me to the punch.
Last edited by Aqualibrium on Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
98234872348
Posts: 1547
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:25 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby 98234872348 » Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:58 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
saito816 wrote:
MrAnon wrote:
I think its worth mentioning being a URM with an Ivy law degree will still open doors. Many of them. Especially if black.


To a limited extent, but URMs outside of the T3 have difficulty finding jobs. URMs at the bottom of the T14 might talk to your average grad of a T50 to understand what the job search will be like.


I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly, are you trying to say that unless you are in the T3, being a URM is such a negative soft that attending a t14 school is the equivalent of being white and attending a T50 :roll: , or are you saying that being at the bottom third at a T14 as a URM is the equivalent of an average person attending a T50


Clearly the later.

Also, clearly not true.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby 09042014 » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:01 pm

Nightrunner wrote:
mistergoft wrote:Also, clearly not true.


Yea I don't think it's true. URMs at NU seem to be big law secure.

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Aqualibrium » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:04 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
Nightrunner wrote:
mistergoft wrote:Also, clearly not true.


Yea I don't think it's true. URMs at NU seem to be big law secure.


While the URM boost is clearly not as pronounced in hiring as it is in admissions, from what I've seen and heard, it seems like above median URM's at t1's generally perform about on par with their top 25% classmates. That means if top 25% kids have a good shot at top firms in the market, then URM's in the top 50% also have a good shot etc... That also means that just like their top 25% classmates, they can come up empty handed if they aren't polished.

User avatar
HarlandBassett
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:50 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby HarlandBassett » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:08 pm

Aqualibrium wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
Nightrunner wrote:
mistergoft wrote:Also, clearly not true.


Yea I don't think it's true. URMs at NU seem to be big law secure.


While the URM boost is clearly not as prevalent in hiring as it is in admissions, from what I've seen and heard, it seems like above median URM's at t1's generally perform about on par with their top 25% classmates. That means if top 25% kids have a good shot at top firms in the market, then URM's in the top 50% also have a good shot etc...

URMs also get better access to valuable internships (undergrad and 1L summer) that give them an upper hand at OCI.

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Aqualibrium » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:11 pm

URMs also get better access to valuable internships (undergrad and 1L summer) that give them an upper hand at OCI.


Agreed, the job fairs that go on in the summer are also invaluable resources. You get the opportunity to interview with firms before anyone else, to get comfortable with interviewing generally, and to maybe have some offers before OCI even starts.

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby MrAnon » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:12 pm

The odds are stacked against them to be the top half of their class if you assume there was a boost to get into the school to begin with.

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Aqualibrium » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:18 pm

MrAnon wrote:The odds are stacked against them to be the top half of their class if you assume there was a boost to get into the school to begin with.



1st :roll:

2nd That wasn't the issue, and that doesn't make your assertion that "URMs outside of the T3 have difficulty finding jobs" any more true than it was (i.e. still absolutely false).

3rd Yes and no. The boost is supposedly in place to compensate for the fact that the odds were "stacked against them" to do well on the lsat. As a result schools look to their undergraduate performance as a better indicator of their ability to succeed in law school. If that has any validity, then the fact that they have a lower lsat shouldn't necessarily mean they won't make at least median (and all of that is predicated on whether you believe the lsat is even an accurate indicator of law school performance or not...I'm not making an argument either way on that point though).

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby MrAnon » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:25 pm

It is a measure of ability to synthesize information quickly and it measures how you compare against all others taking the same test.

I have always assumed there was a GPA boost as well. Wrong?

What I know about URMs finding jobs is what I have seen and heard. However in the final analysis the answer is simply uncertain. We can't figure out whether 5%, 33% or 50% of the entire class of GULC gets BIGLAW with any certainty so I'm pretty sure no one really knows how many URMs from UVA got BIGLAW last year. I'm always suspect of any kind of facts or figures that are thrown around by law students. The better question is why schools allow employment stats to be open to such wide interpretation. Generally they are hiding something and I would not venture to guess any kind of statistic when those in charge go to great lengths to deliberately obfuscate the real situation.
Last edited by MrAnon on Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Aqualibrium » Sat Jan 08, 2011 8:28 pm

MrAnon wrote:It is a measure of ability to synthesize information quickly and it measures how you do that against all others taking the same test.

I have always assumed there was a GPA boost as well. Wrong?



Who knows. I think generally you need a reasonably high gpa to see the lsat boost pay any real dividends. I don't personally really know how the boost works. I applied to schools super late (as in after getting back my feb lsat scores), and my lsat was above my school's 75th and my GPA was below the 25th (but higher than 3.0). I suppose some of the scholarships I got were because of some sort of boost, but my acceptances weren't too extraordinary for a white applicant with the same stats.


edit: In response to your above edit, I generally think you are right about percentages of people who got jobs being thrown around loosely despite the fact that there is little certainty. However, the number I quoted wasn't about how many URM's are getting jobs, but how they can expect to perform in the job market. From what I've seen personally, and from the upperclassmen and current lawyers I've talked to, I think it's safe to say that an above median URM at a t1 can generally expect to perform as well as a top 25% student in their class. I can't speak with as much confidence when it comes to t25 or t14 students, but I know it's anecdotally true that URM's hovering above/below median have a good shot at V100 jobs. Of course the same things that can cause a non URM with top 25% or better grades to strike out can also cause a URM to strike out (no work experience, shitty interviewing skills, etc...).

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby johnnyutah » Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:50 pm

The New York Times weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... ral&src=me

They talk to a Columbia grad doing contract doc review work for 30 an hour, no benefits, in New York City.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby r6_philly » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:26 pm

johnnyutah wrote:The New York Times weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... ral&src=me

They talk to a Columbia grad doing contract doc review work for 30 an hour, no benefits, in New York City.


It only mentions him in passing with no real explanation of his circumstances. reporting that anecdote is about as responsible as saying graduates are employed 9 months post grad even though they are temping in the admissions office. I do like how it details the plight of T3/T4 grads but have to throw a Columbia grad in there. For all we know he could be the last ranked student with multiple felonies after graduation... The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Grizz » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:41 pm

Nightrunner wrote:
r6_philly wrote:The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

I wholeheartedly disagree, if only because this serves as a useful counterpoint (from a major and respectable outlet) to the officially-sanctioned bullshit employment reports.

Additionally, FAR too many people tend to believe that "elite school = I'm set." Sure, most of them will find a way to disregard or otherwise ignore this article, but maybe a few people will actually understand that there are fucked graduates of elite schools, too.


This. Actually about to forward it to someone thinking of going.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby r6_philly » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:54 pm

Nightrunner wrote:
r6_philly wrote:The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

I wholeheartedly disagree, if only because this serves as a useful counterpoint (from a major and respectable outlet) to the officially-sanctioned bullshit employment reports.

Additionally, FAR too many people tend to believe that "elite school = I'm set." Sure, most of them will find a way to disregard or otherwise ignore this article, but maybe a few people will actually understand that there are fucked graduates of elite schools, too.


Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed reading it. I feel like we have different opinions of this issue because I already know every message that it is straining to tell me while you guys are like "wow eye opening". BTW if you don't see how mentioning a Columbia grad in passing is not the same as mentioning a T4 grad making 160k then I am sorry.

Wisdom come from failing. Some of the young and inexperienced will be wise enough to figure this out and avoid the pitfalls, but most will fail. And then, some will learn.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby r6_philly » Sun Jan 09, 2011 3:55 pm

BTW if you guys can manage to discourage most law applicants from attending I would really appreciate it :wink:

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby johnnyutah » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:09 pm

r6_philly wrote:
johnnyutah wrote:The New York Times weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... ral&src=me

They talk to a Columbia grad doing contract doc review work for 30 an hour, no benefits, in New York City.


It only mentions him in passing with no real explanation of his circumstances. reporting that anecdote is about as responsible as saying graduates are employed 9 months post grad even though they are temping in the admissions office. I do like how it details the plight of T3/T4 grads but have to throw a Columbia grad in there. For all we know he could be the last ranked student with multiple felonies after graduation... The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

You're right, the anecdote is definitely not great evidence of anything on its own. But it has meaning when you see it as part of a bigger (and growing) body of evidence - including the ABA's warning, the WSJ's reporting on the issue, and the anecdotes of TLSers themselves - that all point to the idea that the legal job market is so rough right now that even folks from top schools are struggling. A brick is not a wall, etc etc.

User avatar
emhellmer
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 11:53 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby emhellmer » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:40 pm

r6_philly wrote:BTW if you guys can manage to discourage most law applicants from attending I would really appreciate it :wink:


No no no. What I want is to discourage very smart students from attending. Then we can pack the schools with idiots and graduate top of our class no problem :-)

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby 09042014 » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:47 pm

emhellmer wrote:
r6_philly wrote:BTW if you guys can manage to discourage most law applicants from attending I would really appreciate it :wink:


No no no. What I want is to discourage very smart students from attending. Then we can pack the schools with idiots and graduate top of our class no problem :-)


Just go to a TTT.

User avatar
HarlandBassett
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:50 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby HarlandBassett » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:49 pm

johnnyutah wrote:The New York Times weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... ral&src=me

They talk to a Columbia grad doing contract doc review work for 30 an hour, no benefits, in New York City.

Carly Rosenberg is kinda hot.

User avatar
Sinra
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Sinra » Sun Jan 09, 2011 5:58 pm

Nightrunner wrote:
r6_philly wrote:The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

I wholeheartedly disagree, if only because this serves as a useful counterpoint (from a major and respectable outlet) to the officially-sanctioned bullshit employment reports.

Additionally,FAR too many people tend to believe that "elite school = I'm set." Sure, most of them will find a way to disregard or otherwise ignore this article, but maybe a few people will actually understand that there are fucked graduates of elite schools, too.


True. But at the same time, this guy went to the University of Florida Law School, he went to Columbia for undergrad. The NY Times got it wrong (shocking I know!)

Jason graduated from Columbia University in 2005, and spent the past year working as a paralegal for a large New York law firm. In September, he will enter the University of Florida Law School on a full scholarship.

http://www.jccany.org/site/News2?page=N ... le&id=5349



---And I believe this is what most knowledgeable TLSers know is the minimum needed---:

It’s an argument complicated by the reality that a small fraction of graduates are still winning the Big Law sweepstakes. Yes, they tend to hail from the finest law schools, and have the highest G.P.A.’s. But still.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/09/busin ... wanted=all


MrAnon wrote:The odds are stacked against them to be the top half of their class if you assume there was a boost to get into the school to begin with.


And no one around here usually fails to make that particular assumption. :roll:

User avatar
HarlandBassett
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:50 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby HarlandBassett » Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:12 pm

Sinra wrote:
Nightrunner wrote:
r6_philly wrote:The story is about as useful as the employment reports it criticizes.

I wholeheartedly disagree, if only because this serves as a useful counterpoint (from a major and respectable outlet) to the officially-sanctioned bullshit employment reports.

Additionally,FAR too many people tend to believe that "elite school = I'm set." Sure, most of them will find a way to disregard or otherwise ignore this article, but maybe a few people will actually understand that there are fucked graduates of elite schools, too.


True. But at the same time, this guy went to the University of Florida Law School, he went to Columbia for undergrad. The NY Times got it wrong (shocking I know!)

Jason graduated from Columbia University in 2005, and spent the past year working as a paralegal for a large New York law firm. In September, he will enter the University of Florida Law School on a full scholarship.

http://www.jccany.org/site/News2?page=N ... le&id=5349


good sleuthing. i wonder if he got those many-strings-attached full scholarships

Fark-o-vision
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:41 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby Fark-o-vision » Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:35 pm

After talking to a few attorneys and reading a little on the subject, I still think we're all way over-hyping this. Is law school a guarantee? No. Are there risks, and do those risks snowball as you move down the rankings? Of course. Things have changed before, and it seems like they are changing again. That does not mean that "half tuition--at least--and only at the t17". For instance, when my uncle was going through law school it was just shifting to the model we now have. Back then he got into a good school, did all right (he said he "guessed" around the "average") and still got a good job because people saw all grads at Colombia as better than all grads (more or less) from a school like Georgetown. Around the time he graduated it seemed to him like people went the other way, paying more attention to class rank. Where it wasn't the case before, first in your class at Brooklyn law school suddenly looked more attractive than median at Colombia or Cornell. of course, I'm not trying to suggest actual numbers, just illustrate a shift in theory. I haven't down the research needed to give actual numbers, but I think it illustrates the trend. There was an article I read, I think I found it here, that seemed to support some of this, though I think the article put the shift as having occurred much earlier, so maybe its become more pronounced over time.

People on other threads have indicated that firms may be going the other direction, however, deciding that too much talent is being left on the table at nearby elite schools to even bother with locations hours and hours away, or in even investing in multiple hiring searches at a variety of schools.

All in all, yes, most law school school grads will be boned. Because most law school grads attend schools like Phoenix, or La Verne, or California Chirstian (or whatever), Whittier, Chicago-Kent, etc, where almost the entire class is going to be hung out to dry.

My uncle's firm just hired a guy who was median at Hastings. After graduation he did work per diem for about 6 months before being made an offer. I don't know what his salary is now, but I imagine it's comfortable. What this board does best is help people manage expectations, learn about hiring trends, regional issues, or market strengths. it isn't as good when it resorts to chicken little type talk.

Finally, yes I understand anecdote is not rule, but it seemed like he was fairly confident that this would be at least a short term hiring trend for small to medium sized firms, at least in his area. It means a lot of us at middle tier one, or strong tier two schools, we might not have jobs at graduation. But by limiting debt, managing expectations, and understanding that we aren't going to walk out of OCI at the beginning of our second year with a gangbusters job, law school can still pay off for most. I think. Er, hope. What the fuck do I know? 0L.

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby johnnyutah » Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:44 pm

Fark-o-vision wrote:My uncle's firm just hired a guy who was median at Hastings. After graduation he did work per diem for about 6 months before being made an offer.

Your uncle's firm still hiring? :mrgreen:

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: ABA actually warns against law school

Postby JazzOne » Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:47 pm

johnnyutah wrote:
Fark-o-vision wrote:My uncle's firm just hired a guy who was median at Hastings. After graduation he did work per diem for about 6 months before being made an offer.

Your uncle's firm still hiring? :mrgreen:

lol




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests