Need Help before April 15th! Tough Decision! Forum

[souman5]

the others are fairly easy to meet (top 50% of class). I can also mitigate cost at Suffolk by living at home

I think your confidence is unfounded.
Do they stack sections? What percentage of recipients keep their scholarships? I think that information is mandatory for them to disclose.

Souman, that is a very important idea that you might not realize. Most people don't so it's no problem. Law School is different from the vast majority of colleges. You don't "earn" grades. In high school and college, if you wrote a good enough essay, you'd get an A or a B. In law school, your work is then weighed against all of your classmates, and the professor assigns all of the grades along a bell curve, the median at Suffolk being a 3.02. This means it doesn't just mean how good your work is, it matters how good your rivals in class do as well. Hypothetically speaking, let's say you have an issue spotting exam where the professor has intentionally placed 15 issues inside. Let's say you do a really good job and spot 12. That's around an 80%, not bad. However, the average amount is 13, and 4 people know the law so well, they spotted more issues than the professor intended. Those 4 are going to get the As and the A-'s in your class. Unfortunately, you'd fall below median on the bell curve, and so you're assigned like a C and you're below 50% and you lose your scholarship. It's a horribly flawed system but it is what it is.

Law Schools are businesses and many try to use that curve to their favor. They do something called section stacking. They'll place all the scholarship students into a single section and force them to compete against one another for grades. Because of the curve, exactly half must come in below median by definition, and so half the students lose their scholarships. To my experience, schools won't admit to section stacking, but definitely find out what percentage retain their scholarships.

Now, I know we sound like broken records, but retake is your best option. If you want to crack the MA biglaw market at Suffolk, you're going to need to finish in the top 10% to have a shot, and because of others' ties, probably top 5%. As you can see, they can make that virtually impossible. Heck, at Suffolk, you need to be top 40% to have a shot at any legal job at all. If you retake and get even a 161, you stand a real shot at grabbing money at Boston College. BC gives you over three times the chance of snagging biglaw. You might even squeak into the T14, which will exponentially increase your career prospects. By waiting a single year, you can literally change your life.

Thanks for the information. I did know much of this already but I appreciate you helping me out. and Noted on the retake, I'm not blind to the fact and I'm seriously considering retaking it but also considering my options. Clarification: Are you suggesting I retake to apply for the class of 2018 or 2019? 2018 would require taking the test this year (not enough time to jump back on, relearning and push to do better).

[Gooner91]

- I received a Sargent Scholarship which is why I'm confident I'd keep the value of my loans (at least through 2L) More on the scholarship: "o Sargent Scholarships are awarded based on financial need and academic qualifications. A Sargent Scholarship recipient who is eligible to continue their enrollment at Suffolk but whose GPA falls below 3.0 and therefore loses their Sargent Scholarship will receive 75% of their original Sargent Scholarship amount as a Trustee Grant if they apply for financial aid by the appropriate deadlines for returning students and continue to demonstrate financial need."

Losing at least 25% of your scholarship if you fall below a 3.0 looks like a stipulation to me. What class rank is a 3.0?
And this was the offer with the best stip?

[MistakenGenius]

Post removed.

[souman5]

- I received a Sargent Scholarship which is why I'm confident I'd keep the value of my loans (at least through 2L) More on the scholarship: "o Sargent Scholarships are awarded based on financial need and academic qualifications. A Sargent Scholarship recipient who is eligible to continue their enrollment at Suffolk but whose GPA falls below 3.0 and therefore loses their Sargent Scholarship will receive 75% of their original Sargent Scholarship amount as a Trustee Grant if they apply for financial aid by the appropriate deadlines for returning students and continue to demonstrate financial need."

Losing at least 25% of your scholarship if you fall below a 3.0 looks like a stipulation to me. What class rank is a 3.0?
And this was the offer with the best stip?

I think the 85% stat clears this up though. 85% of recipients keep these kinds of scholarships. so 25% of recipients fall below 3.0.

[deuceindc]

I think the 85% stat clears this up though. 85% of recipients keep these kinds of scholarships. so 25% of recipients fall below 3.0.

Check your math.

What's your take on my BC/Suffolk dilemma?

Suffolk is objectively bad at placing its students into the types of jobs they have attended the school to obtain; even if the full ride were guaranteed, I would not recommend going there. BC is a good, expensive law school; I would not recommend attending at sticker.

How many times have you taken the LSAT?

[03152016]

You already know why retaking is the only credited response; no reason to waste that GPA on your current options. But if I was looking at the NY market and committed to not retaking, I'd go with Brooklyn over Hofstra and NYLS.

But please, please retake. NYU/Columbia with $$ beats Brooklyn with $ by miles, and three months of studying is well worth the difference.

[Tom Joad]

If you have work experience, get an M7 MBA. These options are terrible.

[souman5]

I think the 85% stat clears this up though. 85% of recipients keep these kinds of scholarships. so 25% of recipients fall below 3.0.

Check your math.

What's your take on my BC/Suffolk dilemma?

Suffolk is objectively bad at placing its students into the types of jobs they have attended the school to obtain; even if the full ride were guaranteed, I would not recommend going there. BC is a good, expensive law school; I would not recommend attending at sticker.

How many times have you taken the LSAT?

Assuming tuition is around 46k, how much of a scholarship do you consider worth it to attend BC?

[souman5]

You already know why retaking is the only credited response; no reason to waste that GPA on your current options. But if I was looking at the NY market and committed to not retaking, I'd go with Brooklyn over Hofstra and NYLS.

But please, please retake. NYU/Columbia with $$ beats Brooklyn with $ by miles, and three months of studying is well worth the difference.

Agreed and thanks for laying out my options (and not just leaving it at retake). Over time and as I've talked to more people retaking has become a more prominent choice (partly due to the badgering here).

I'm curious as to why you'd choose Brooklyn over Hofstra/NYLS (assuming no retake - which as I've mentioned above I'm seriously considering). Brooklyn is more expensive than all (regularly one of the most expensive in the country) and I'm getting minimal aid (around 26k).

[03152016]

You already know why retaking is the only credited response; no reason to waste that GPA on your current options. But if I was looking at the NY market and committed to not retaking, I'd go with Brooklyn over Hofstra and NYLS.

But please, please retake. NYU/Columbia with $$ beats Brooklyn with $ by miles, and three months of studying is well worth the difference.

Agreed and thanks for laying out my options (and not just leaving it at retake). Over time and as I've talked to more people retaking has become a more prominent choice (partly due to the badgering here).

I'm curious as to why you'd choose Brooklyn over Hofstra/NYLS (assuming no retake - which as I've mentioned above I'm seriously considering). Brooklyn is more expensive than all (regularly one of the most expensive in the country) and I'm getting minimal aid (around 26k).

We'll have to see what happens when Hofstra's 2013 numbers come out, but Brooklyn placed 57.3% of its class in long-term, full-time, JD-required positions, vs. Hofstra's 51.2% (last year's numbers for Hofstra, so it's not a great comparison). Brooklyn's biglaw + fed clerkship is 14% to Hofstra's 5.2% (again, last year's numbers). Hofstra grads are more likely to work in firms, but in smaller ones -- Hofstra sent 37.6% of grads to firms of 2 to 10 people and 4.4% to biglaw, Brooklyn sent 14% of grads to firms of 2 to 10 people and 11% to biglaw. Brooklyn sends more to government/PI, but since they don't break down the numbers, it's not very useful information. I am suspicious of Brooklyn's numbers given the higher JD-advantage numbers and people entering "Business and Industry". Still, taking everything into account, I'd go with Brooklyn.

Also, might be a little biased towards Brooklyn because a) I know Brooklyn and Hofstra grads who have had pretty different outcomes, and b) I love Brooklyn, and have zero interest in Hempstead.

Also, retake.

[03152016]

Also, I'm not going to acknowledge NYLS is on the table unless you get a full-ride, a stipend to cover all COL, and Paul Cravath himself rises from the dead pleading with you to attend NYLS and guaranteeing you partner track.

And even then I'm 50/50.

[souman5]

Also, I'm not going to acknowledge NYLS is on the table unless you get a full-ride, a stipend to cover all COL, and Paul Cravath himself rises from the dead pleading with you to attend NYLS and guaranteeing you partner track.

And even then I'm 50/50.

Lol noted. I have a friend who went there, got into big law 120k a year paid off in a few years then went on for his career goals. That's why I'm still considering it.

[Nova]

Also, I'm not going to acknowledge NYLS is on the table unless you get a full-ride, a stipend to cover all COL, and Paul Cravath himself rises from the dead pleading with you to attend NYLS and guaranteeing you partner track.

And even then I'm 50/50.

Lol noted. I have a friend who went there, got into big law 120k a year paid off in a few years then went on for his career goals. That's why I'm still considering it.

Less than 5% of their class land firm 100+ lawyer law form jobs

Less that 40% of their class land any kind of real lawyer job

[souman5]

You already know why retaking is the only credited response; no reason to waste that GPA on your current options. But if I was looking at the NY market and committed to not retaking, I'd go with Brooklyn over Hofstra and NYLS.

But please, please retake. NYU/Columbia with $$ beats Brooklyn with $ by miles, and three months of studying is well worth the difference.

Agreed and thanks for laying out my options (and not just leaving it at retake). Over time and as I've talked to more people retaking has become a more prominent choice (partly due to the badgering here).

I'm curious as to why you'd choose Brooklyn over Hofstra/NYLS (assuming no retake - which as I've mentioned above I'm seriously considering). Brooklyn is more expensive than all (regularly one of the most expensive in the country) and I'm getting minimal aid (around 26k).

We'll have to see what happens when Hofstra's 2013 numbers come out, but Brooklyn placed 57.3% of its class in long-term, full-time, JD-required positions, vs. Hofstra's 51.2% (last year's numbers for Hofstra, so it's not a great comparison). Brooklyn's biglaw + fed clerkship is 14% to Hofstra's 5.2% (again, last year's numbers). Hofstra grads are more likely to work in firms, but in smaller ones -- Hofstra sent 37.6% of grads to firms of 2 to 10 people and 4.4% to biglaw, Brooklyn sent 14% of grads to firms of 2 to 10 people and 11% to biglaw. Brooklyn sends more to government/PI, but since they don't break down the numbers, it's not very useful information. I am suspicious of Brooklyn's numbers given the higher JD-advantage numbers and people entering "Business and Industry". Still, taking everything into account, I'd go with Brooklyn.

Also, might be a little biased towards Brooklyn because a) I know Brooklyn and Hofstra grads who have had pretty different outcomes, and b) I love Brooklyn, and have zero interest in Hempstead.

Also, retake.

Curious how much you think BC is worth. In other words, how much debt is it "worth" accruing? Or how much tuition should I aim to get covered to make it a financially sound decision? (assuming a retake)

[justonemoregame]

IMO, BC is worth an amount which would not put you over a debt-at-graduation level serviceable on a median-level type outcome from the school. So, how much debt could you service on 40-50K (for example - I don't know what BC median outcomes are).

In my experience, 2-1 DTI is not fun, but doable, esp. if you have a live-in who has a decent job, too.

[souman5]

IMO, BC is worth an amount which would not put you over a debt-at-graduation level serviceable on a median-level type outcome from the school. So, how much debt could you service on 40-50K (for example - I don't know what BC median outcomes are).

In my experience, 2-1 DTI is not fun, but doable, esp. if you have a live-in who has a decent job, too.

yea but medians can be misleading, but i generally get what you're saying.

Class of 2013 had 33% of students with jobs going to firms with 100+ http://www.bc.edu/content/bc/schools/la ... _full.html

Of those outcomes bottom 25% earned 145k, 95k, and 150k. In smaller firms it came out to around 50k-60k. I've found UMich calculator pretty useful (though I use several): https://www.law.umich.edu/financialaid/ ... lator.aspx

102k seems manageable but not much higher. Thoughts?

[Big Dog]

Not thinking clearly would be not making a decision with a complete picture

But that is the point that you clearly cannot (or don't want to) see.

According to your own post, you have SEVEN schools that you have yet to hear from. Fixating on a TTT even with a full ride is a waste of brain processing power since........ you......... do......... not........ have....... a "complete picture."

Beyond the seven schools, you are also missing a picture of how much money these schools would throw at you with a 165+.

Retake. Don't settle.

[yomisterd]

I think we need more data on your LSAT score. Is it your first LSAT? How did you study? Were you at "full strength" when you took it? Like other people have said, 3.8 is a great GPA and could net you life-changing opportunities when paired with a good LSAT score, especially when compared to your current options.

[souman5]

Not thinking clearly would be not making a decision with a complete picture

But that is the point that you clearly cannot (or don't want to) see.

According to your own post, you have SEVEN schools that you have yet to hear from. Fixating on a TTT even with a full ride is a waste of brain processing power since........ you......... do......... not........ have....... a "complete picture."

Beyond the seven schools, you are also missing a picture of how much money these schools would throw at you with a 165+.

Retake. Don't settle.

right, but discussing and parsing through each option is what I meant about completing the picture through discussion. Noted on the retake.

[souman5]

I think we need more data on your LSAT score. Is it your first LSAT? How did you study? Were you at "full strength" when you took it? Like other people have said, 3.8 is a great GPA and could net you life-changing opportunities when paired with a good LSAT score, especially when compared to your current options.

Yes my first, I took a prep course over the summer (Testmasters), working full time, studied every second after work, every weekend. I did full review of my incorrect and correct answers to make sure I was getting them right for the right reasons and why I was getting questions wrong. My LSAT score wasn't the highest it could have been but my other scores were 157, 158, 159, 160 (not in that order, it went up and down).

If I retake, I'd have to go for the oct or december test and I'd be doing the same (working 40 hours a week) and grinding out every weekend - where I wouldn't expect to make over a 160. June isn't a possibility to assume the same or higher grade. If December I might have to just skip the next application cycle and have to go 2 years from now.

That's my LSAT situation.

[souman5]

+