Ms. B wrote:Ti Malice wrote:Ms. B wrote: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.
First of all, you are a 0L so your opinion is just that: an opinion, unsupported by evidence. I'm not sure why you would discount the unanimous agreement of current and former students in favor of your own unsupported opinion.
Second, your assessment of your "intelligence and work ethic in relation to others" is based off your competition at undergraduate schools, who come from a variety of backgrounds and possess widely varying levels of work ethic and intelligence. In Law School, you are exclusively pitted against those who performed similarly in re to GPA and LSAT. This filtering mechanism ensures your classmates will be at a similar level as you: therefore, your past experiences are irrelevant, because the competition has entirely changed.
Finally, your friend in Harvard is being nice to you because he/she goes to Harvard. He/she isn't going to say "you're considering going where?" because you're friends, and he/she doesn't want to come across as elitist. Furthermore, he/she is just one person who may or may not be informed re: the state of the legal market. Going to a T3 school tends to insulate you from negative outcomes. You should be seeking evidence from people who have gone to similarly ranked schools, and those who have done research on the statistical outcomes of its graduates. That evidence suggests your options will very likely end in failure.