BLS v. Uconn v. Penn State v. Cardozo Forum

[Clearly]

No one is interested in big law for anything but money, it's billable torture. As you said, if you were offered the gig, you'd take it for the money, so you could service your debt, which is exactly what were all trying to do. Seriously, go on lsn and look at the underemployment stats for all these schools, then look at UVA/nu, Cornell... How can you imply you wouldn't be better off!?

[thethe]

I probably should clarify- I dont know too much about IP, I'm just interested in learning more about patents, trademarks, and copyrights; those fields are what got me interested in law in the first place. I don't want to be a killer litigator; I see myself looking for a career outside of the court room- I would love to be a mediator/arbitrator ultimately, but I understand that I need practical experience before doing so. (Only reason I didn't apply to Pepperdine for ADR is bc I'd be too far from my fam; same goes for Ohio St)

As for the prior LSAT discussion- hypothetically, lets say I got a 165 and had my 3.9... lets say doors open to schools such as BC, BU, GW, Fordham, and MAYBE cornell/UVA- but with little to no scholly. Would I really be so much better off paying out the ass when I'm not interested in biglaw (I mean, besides for the money; if I somehow can secure a biglaw position, I'd obviously take it for my first few years for $$)?

I may sound like I havent done my research, but I have. I just don't know EXACTLY what field of law I see myself ending up practicing. I also don;t know EXACTLY where I want to live. I do know, however, that there are thousands of lawyers coming from schools outside of the T14 who do find jobs and do live happily and comfortably.

there really isn't a lot of in between. you'll only make 30-40k or 100k+ most likely unless you do public service which is just as hard as the 100k+ jobs.

you will work your butt off. if you don't want big law and aren't all about $ that just makes the retake more important. you can go to cardozo for free, and you won't be paying sticker to these schools. you'd get a t-14 with $. applications would be down, you'd be above a median and you'd show the school you have the baseline LSAT skills necessary to compete against 170 3.8 students.

it's a night and day situation. i'm not saying you don't have what it takes or i'm better than you because i go to a prestigious school. i'm saying you can be as good or likely better than me if you stop being a child, and be smart here. this is a career altering decision.

[thethe]

and 165 3.9 sticker won't pay sticker at any non top 14. if fordham were less cheap you'd possibly get a full ride. you'd get real money to bu and bc.... close to a full ride. you'd be in great shape. if you got a 172 you can go to harvard, and not have much stress about jobs.

do you know what most law students right now would give for knowing they just have to be middle of the pack to get an amazing job? you do not understand what opportunity your current free rent + 3.9 presents you with. you can have an amazing life... full of hard work but a great life. you can also have a very difficult life full of hard work but without the salary to live a good life.

you have next year to start law school - this is not a once in a lifetime opportunity. the being young with free rent and 3.9 UGPA is the once in a lifetime opportunity. if you had most of your $ in a stock that dropped a lot but you knew it couldn't get worse and could very possibly skyrocket in a year, would you sell it? you'd find whatever scraps you needed to survive and you'd wait it out, bec. that'd be the smart move.

[Ms. B]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Not trying to prove anybody wrong or anything by the way, just felt inclined to offer a different perpsective...

[LRGhost]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

Consider the costs of it. A quarter of a million dollars and a black mark on your resume is worse than Juliard by far.

[Mal Reynolds]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

[rad lulz]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

When you can retake to get $$$$ at a school that will give like 80% of the class GREAT outcomes, then yes, it's stupid.

[thethe]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

When you can retake to get $$$$ at a school that will give like 80% of the class GREAT outcomes, then yes, it's stupid.

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

[Ms. B]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

Consider the costs of it. A quarter of a million dollars and a black mark on your resume is worse than Juliard by far.

Hence financially repsonsible, if OP (and myself) can keep costs down to below $70,000. I don't see what all the fuss is about as long as we perform well in school. As a sidenote, with tuition at Juliard at $35,000/year and not nearly the cash to throw around for scholarship as most law schools, I don't really see how it is a better situation. Also have a friend who is AMAZING and just got her graduate degree from there a year ago. She is now bartending and playing for weddings:( Not saying an amazing career isn't in her future, but it sure is harder to conceptualize.

[Ms. B]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

When you can retake to get $$$$ at a school that will give like 80% of the class GREAT outcomes, then yes, it's stupid.

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

wow is that really what the legal profession has become on this site? Prostituting oneself for money? If that is seriously your take then what could you possibly know about passion?

[thethe]

OK, I'm new to the site and would just like to pose my situation to all the "retake" advocates. I come from a bit of a different background as I studied music performance at a top conservatory for my undergrad. I have decided to go to law school instead of going to graduate school for my instrument. Some might say this is a bad decision, but honestly, I doubt anyone could even find employment stats at a music school because, even at Juliard or Curtis those employed in their field 2-3 years out is probably less than 10%. That said, I'm considering a lot of the schools OP has mentioned and while some of you are describing an employment rate hovering around 50% upon graduation as abysmal, that seems pretty promising from my perspective. While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school. Just trying to throw a new perspective in here by the way....hope I'm not stepping on anyone's toes!

When you can retake to get $$$$ at a school that will give like 80% of the class GREAT outcomes, then yes, it's stupid.

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

wow is that really what law shool has become on this site? Prostituting oneself for money? If that is seriously your take then what could you possibly know about passion?

Noooo I'm not saying law is anything like that. It's a very noble field compared to others.

What I'm saying is you are leaving your dream for what I am assuming is a more stable life. In this sense, prostitution is not a bad thing necessarily, and can be a good thing, but not all prostitutes are equal.

Plus being a good lawyer means being good for your clients, which means always serving their best interests without breaking other rules. Often times your clients may be in the moral wrong, but you still fight for them. In this sense, this fits the textbook definition of prostitution. I personally am fine prostituting myself for clients, but only above a certain salary and no kiddie porn, klan members, neo-nazis or terrorists.

[Ms. B]

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

wow is that really what law shool has become on this site? Prostituting oneself for money? If that is seriously your take then what could you possibly know about passion?

Noooo I'm not saying law is anything like that. It's a very noble field compared to others.

What I'm saying is you are leaving your dream for what I am assuming is a more stable life. In this sense, prostitution is not a bad thing necessarily, and can be a good thing, but not all prostitutes are equal.

sorry to misinterpret you then...I guess I follow your analogy but securing a more stable life isn't really the motivation behind my decision and I'm not about to rewrite my personal statement on here haha. Thanks for clarifying though.

[LRGhost]

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

wow is that really what law shool has become on this site? Prostituting oneself for money? If that is seriously your take then what could you possibly know about passion?

Noooo I'm not saying law is anything like that. It's a very noble field compared to others.

What I'm saying is you are leaving your dream for what I am assuming is a more stable life. In this sense, prostitution is not a bad thing necessarily, and can be a good thing, but not all prostitutes are equal.

sorry to misinterpret you then...I guess I follow your analogy but securing a more stable life isn't really the motivation behind my decision and I'm not about to rewrite my personal statement on here haha. Thanks for clarifying though.

The problem is that there's no guarantee of you doing well in school. Especially at worse schools where you can keep debt down, you need to do more than just do well. You need to be lucky on top of that.

[thethe]

Eh being good at law school tests is no more about luck than being a musical virtuoso. However, being top 5 percent is some luck - having a good day on every exam, getting colds at only the right time, the exam playing to your strong suit, a professor who just skims exams to grade liking a few random sentences more than others' they skim, etc. And you need top 5 percent to turn these schools into strong outcomes at sticker.

[thethe]

also, if you're leaving your passion to prostitute yourself for money, there's a difference between being a dame who gets paid 10k an hour to sleep with politicians and a woman in an alleyway by the projects charging 20 a blow and 50 a lay.

wow is that really what law shool has become on this site? Prostituting oneself for money? If that is seriously your take then what could you possibly know about passion?

Noooo I'm not saying law is anything like that. It's a very noble field compared to others.

What I'm saying is you are leaving your dream for what I am assuming is a more stable life. In this sense, prostitution is not a bad thing necessarily, and can be a good thing, but not all prostitutes are equal.

sorry to misinterpret you then...I guess I follow your analogy but securing a more stable life isn't really the motivation behind my decision and I'm not about to rewrite my personal statement on here haha. Thanks for clarifying though.

Well, more stable life is the baseline goal. We all have lofty aspirations and things we're passionate about in this field. However, a stable life is kind of a necessary condition to being able to accomplish anything. If you're worried about how you're going to pay rent or fall into situations with creditors, it's difficult to do your best to accomplish a goal of say, fighting for equal rights for women or helping people with disabilities facing discrimination. It's likely your goals are laudable, but if they're more than just stability, then you need an even better outcome than what I am saying here. There are many schools that give you a great shot at these outcomes. They just happen to mostly be ranked in the top 14.

[Clearly]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

Eh, Stonybrook and Binghampton are fairly respectable schools.

[LRGhost]

Well, more stable life is the baseline goal. We all have lofty aspirations and things we're passionate about in this field. However, a stable life is kind of a necessary condition to being able to accomplish anything. If you're worried about how you're going to pay rent or fall into situations with creditors, it's difficult to do your best to accomplish a goal of say, fighting for equal rights for women or helping people with disabilities facing discrimination. It's likely your goals are laudable, but if they're more than just stability, then you need an even better outcome than what I am saying here. There are many schools that give you a great shot at these outcomes. They just happen to mostly be ranked in the top 14.

If you really want to do your best to help women, work against discrimination, etc., go to a good school so you can get good internships.

[thethe]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

ladies and gentleman, we have a rich kid.

[leslie-knope]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

You must not be from New York. SUNY's, especially the best ones (Binghamton, Geneseo if you're upstate, Stonybrook, Albany) are held in very high regard here.

[Ti Malice]

While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school.

This doesn't become a financially responsible decision simply by virtue of being superior to another awful option. Almost all of your classmates will "really apply" themselves as well, and you have no idea of how well you'll perform on law school exams relative to your peers. (And relative performance is all that matters. You can write an objectively very good exam, but if the professor thinks 60% of the class wrote even better exams, you're getting a bad grade. If even 25% of the class writes a better exam, you're getting a bad grade compared to what you'll need from a TTT.)

Job prospects decline much faster than student ability as you go down the rankings, which is why it's rank idiocy to impatiently rush past what is by far the most consequential test for your future as a lawyer (the LSAT), a test over which you still exert total control, in order to start "applying yourself" from a greatly disadvantaged position at the outset. You will have far less margin for error at a lower-ranked school, and your competition isn't going to roll over for you. They'll work just as hard as you will.

[nebula666]

If you want someone to tell you that your decisions are great, talk to your mom.

If you want real advice, please don't flush your GPA down the toilet.

[Mal Reynolds]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

You must not be from New York. SUNY's, especially the best ones (Binghamton, Geneseo if you're upstate, Stonybrook, Albany) are held in very high regard here.

It's like you're trying to prove my point for me.

[thethe]

You need to understand if your parents aren't very rich, being that they were likely in their prime during the boom times, they are probably not smarter with investments than most kids at top law programs.

You also should consider your parents just want to feel like they did a good job, which is measured by you leaving. Their goal is to feel like they did a good job, and they are not objective. Adhering to their advice on anything but which of these 2 girls is better, or their area of expertise is going to be dumb. Most of our parents would be poor if they were in our generation, as most of our generation is poor.

[LRGhost]

What does a top SUNY school mean? Isn't that like being the tallest midget?

You must not be from New York. SUNY's, especially the best ones (Binghamton, Geneseo if you're upstate, Stonybrook, Albany) are held in very high regard here.

It's like you're trying to prove my point for me.

There's nothing wrong with some of the top SUNYs bro.

[Ms. B]

While I admire the sentiment of not rushing into the decision to go to law school, I don't believe myself or anyone else considering schools of this caliber to be in the horrible predicament you paint for us as long as we make a financially responsible decision and REALLY apply ourselves upon attending law school.

This doesn't become a financially responsible decision simply by virtue of being superior to another awful option. Almost all of your classmates will "really apply" themselves as well, and you have no idea of how well you'll perform on law school exams relative to your peers. (And relative performance is all that matters. You can write an objectively very good exam, but if the professor thinks 60% of the class wrote even better exams, you're getting a bad grade. If even 25% of the class writes a better exam, you're getting a bad grade compared to what you'll need from a TTT.)

Job prospects decline much faster than student ability as you go down the rankings, which is why it's rank idiocy to impatiently rush past what is by far the most consequential test for your future as a lawyer (the LSAT), a test over which you still exert total control, in order to start "applying yourself" from a greatly disadvantaged position at the outset. You will have far less margin for error at a lower-ranked school, and your competition isn't going to roll over for you. They'll work just as hard as you will.

I know law school is its own bag AND that I'm a 0L, but I just don't buy the fact that law school is as unpredictable as everyone on here says it is. I think at this point of our lives, we have a decent assessment of our own intelligence/work ethic ratio in comparison to others. Going to law school obviously does not make one "smart" or motivated by default so why would our view of ourselves be any less valid in law school than it would anywhere else? Not to mention, I have a good friend who was on law review at Harvard (currently works in NYC) and thinks both of these are viable options as long as I bust my ass and am fully committed--which I am. I don't want this to come accross as defensive since I think you bring up a valid point, and maybe I'm just being elitist, but I think confidence combined with gumption can go further than you think.