BigZuck wrote:Numerous people who know what they are talking about and have thousands of posts disagree with you and you still sit here and try to argue with them?
I think your trolling has run its course, 7 pages of this nonsense is more than enough.
For future 0Ls reading this, here are the key points:
1. Fordham and Georgetown are classic trap schools that should only be attended with a steep discount. What does that mean? Probably close to a full ride at Fordham and at least 90K at Georgetown.
2. If you have to, retake the LSAT until you get into a sensible school at a sensible price.
I realize that the designation above may just be a result of your frustration with the OP, but if not, then can you really justify painting Georgetown with the same "trap school" brush as Fordham?
While I don't believe that sticker debt for an "unhooked" candidate (non-URM, non-IP) is justifiable in the lower T14, I do believe that, if you are willing to justify it for DNC, then you should probably do so for GULC as well. You really do have to compare GULC with its traditional peers with the understanding the Georgetown is in fact a HEAVILY PI-Oriented school; the relevant comparison, therefore, should take the school-funded jobs ENTIRELY out of the equation and simply compare biglaw + FedClerk + FT JDA + FT JD-Required jobs. Doing so still demonstrates a gap betwen GULC and DNC, but it is certainly not cavernous enough to justify sticker debt at the latter and not justify it at the former. At any rate, the employment stats DO NOT suggest that sticker at DNC would be dandy but GULC would require a 90,000 dollar scholarship. Copying and pasting from a previous thread:
First of all, to recap, I agree with you about bottom of the barrel outcomes; they certainly have been worse at GULC than DNC.
I also agree that, in order to give a clearer and fairer picture of GULC versus DNC w.r.t decent outcomes, we should just consider removing the school-funded jobs altogether from GULC's FTLT rate for both Bar Passage required and JDA jobs. Doing so gives us the following for the class of 2012:
GULC (73.3-6.5 (for school-funded positions) + (14.4 JD Adv FTLT - 3% School funded)) = 78%.
The corresponding % for Cornell and NU is 85% each.
Obviously, there is a significant (though not game-changingly massive) difference here ( - 7%, owing to GULC's unwieldy class size) that 0Ls will have to perform their own risk assessment on. But, I believe that the numbers ABOVE are the most accurate indicators of GULC v. DNC's placement power, NOT the BigLaw + FedClerk comparison because you HAVE TO account for GULC's PI and Gov emphasis when considering its placement power.
It is by no means the case that biglaw is foreclosed to kids at GULC's median; why should it be, when GULC's student quality is consistently higher than Cornell's and Berk's and basically identical to UVA/Michigan? There are people here in the bottom 40% getting biglaw from OCI. This is NOT the case for great schools that sit right on the cusp of the T14, e.g. Vandy and UT, so claiming that, somehow, GULC and those schools are peers is just basically untrue.
Also, if you are going to subtract part-time salary outcomes from Georgetown's, then you have to subtract the part-time students from the TOTAL as well, since those students would likely not have sought biglaw in the first place (if 20% of GULC is part time, then their 40% biglaw rate would comprise 50% of the full-time class).
I think that it's perfectly fine to discourage sticker debt at Georgetown, but I think we should be fucking realistic about the relative merits of the school rather than paint Georgetown and FORDHAM or GW with the same brush.