Choosing a law school based on ...... Forum

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

[Clearly]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Seriously though, while you might end up with a higher end gpa (or might not), the reality is the same employers aren't even bothering to recruit there, it'd be foolish to count on a better outcome than your peers.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Swing, and a miss.

[Clearly]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Swing, and a miss.

Note the next two words if you're gonna quote. Oh and all the serious points after.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Swing, and a miss.

Note the next two words if you're gonna quote. Oh and all the serious points after.

You still don't get it.

[Clearly]

so explain...

[totesTheGoat]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Assuming that you're going to do better than median just based on the other schools you got into is REALLY risky. The correlation between UGPA+LSAT to law grades is loose, at best.

The correlation between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2010, validity studies were conducted for 189 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .12 to .56 (median is .36). The correlations between UGPA and first-year law grades ranged from .09 to .45 (median is .28). However, correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .30 to .62 (median is .48).

http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/your-score/ ... erformance

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Assuming that you're going to do better than median just based on the other schools you got into is REALLY risky. The correlation between UGPA+LSAT to law grades is loose, at best.

The correlation between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2010, validity studies were conducted for 189 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .12 to .56 (median is .36). The correlations between UGPA and first-year law grades ranged from .09 to .45 (median is .28). However, correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .30 to .62 (median is .48).

http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/your-score/ ... erformance

Think.

All of these studies are irrelevant to my point. Your link references intra-school studies conducted at many different law schools. None of the studies compare, nor could they, students at different law schools. However, it is this inter-school comparison that I am suggesting TLS misses on by a large margin.

Yes, going to Yale and thinking you will finish at the top of the class because you have a 178 and a 4.0 where the average Yalie has a 173 and a 3.9 is risky. But that isn't what I'm suggesting anyone do. What I am suggesting is that if you got into Yale because you had a 179 and a 4.0 but decided to attend the University of New Mexico, it is completely asinine to believe that you only have a 50% chance of becoming a lawyer because "only 50% of UNM students get jobs." I'm shocked that people who take logic tests keep fouling this one up. The average LSAT score at a place like UNM is probably like 153. The types of students that attend UNM is of an entirely different sort than the types of students that attend Notre Dame, let alone T10/T14. And I'm not just talking GPA/LSAT. The total application package will be different, from letters of reference to personal statements. The Yale guy/gal/ringer will not only be one of the brightest people in the class, but also, and much more importantly, this person is going to be one of the hardest workers and greatest strivers. The only way this person graduates from UNM without a job is if they do not seek employment or pick up a felony.

If you ran the fastest time in the nation for a high school student in the 100 meter dash, would assume you would be middle of the pack on the track team of a Division 3 University? But when it comes to academics, the echo chamber tells the 0Ls that law school is the great reset button. It's bullshit. The same smarts and work ethic that got billy and suzy into a T-14 law school doesn't go away when they enroll at the University of New Mexico. Will there be outliers at the lower tiered schools? Of course. I'm sure there are brilliant and hard-working people that go to school everywhere, some of whom probably didn't even bother to apply outside of their home state. But they are the exceptions that highlight the rule, and there is no study to suggest otherwise.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Swing, and a miss.

Note the next two words if you're gonna quote. Oh and all the serious points after.

You still don't get it.

so explain...

Who cares if the number remains constant and is already reflected in the data? The number probably does remain somewhat constant and OF COURSE it is reflected in the data....

Let's say every single year 5% of 1L's at the University of New Mexico turned down the T-14. Upon graduation, 100% of this small subsection of students is employed. Every. Single. Year.

[Clearly]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Counterpoint: what if that number remains constant and is already reflected in the data.

Swing, and a miss.

Note the next two words if you're gonna quote. Oh and all the serious points after.

You still don't get it.

so explain...

Who cares if the number remains constant and is already reflected in the data? The number probably does remain somewhat constant and OF COURSE it is reflected in the data....

Let's say every single year 5% of 1L's at the University of New Mexico turned down the T-14. Upon graduation, 100% of this small subsection of students is employed. Every. Single. Year.

Do you fail to see that I understand this? Thus why I said seriously though immediately afterwards. You opted to omit the part of the quote that indicates I'm not being serious. Admittedly I could have made it more clear that I'm messing around. I'm waiting for you to address my whole post, the part following seriously though presents my actual beef with your suggestion.

[totesTheGoat]

What I am suggesting is that if you got into Yale because you had a 179 and a 4.0 but decided to attend the University of New Mexico, it is completely asinine to believe that you only have a 50% chance of becoming a lawyer because "only 50% of UNM students get jobs." I'm shocked that people who take logic tests keep fouling this one up.

Marginally relevant. Work ethic and diligence aren't the only qualities that get you hired. I'll give you that they probably have higher than 50%, just because of the loose correlations of LSAT/UGPA to law school GPA, but let's not pretend that somebody who chooses UNM over UVA is guaranteed to be top 5%.

The average LSAT score at a place like UNM is probably like 153. The types of students that attend UNM is of an entirely different sort than the types of students that attend Notre Dame, let alone T10/T14. And I'm not just talking GPA/LSAT. The total application package will be different, from letters of reference to personal statements. The Yale guy/gal/ringer will not only be one of the brightest people in the class, but also, and much more importantly, this person is going to be one of the hardest workers and greatest strivers. The only way this person graduates from UNM without a job is if they do not seek employment or pick up a felony.

Bullshit. The difference in difficulty from HYS to a T2 isn't as big as you make it. Also, law school grades aren't an objective measure of the characteristics that led to a good UGPA/LSAT.

If you ran the fastest time in the nation for a high school student in the 100 meter dash, would assume you would be middle of the pack on the track team of a Division 3 University?

1) Your analogy sucks. Track is an objective athletic competition. Law school is a subjective test of minimum knowledge and writing style. You can't just spend more time in the library and increase your performance in a class ad infinitum.
2) A D3 "superstar" still gets fewer looks from the Olympic Committee than a D1 "superstar."

But when it comes to academics, the echo chamber tells the 0Ls that law school is the great reset button. It's bullshit. The same smarts and work ethic that got billy and suzy into a T-14 law school doesn't go away when they enroll at the University of New Mexico. Will there be outliers at the lower tiered schools? Of course. I'm sure there are brilliant and hard-working people that go to school everywhere, some of whom probably didn't even bother to apply outside of their home state. But they are the exceptions that highlight the rule, and there is no study to suggest otherwise.

Your assumptions are ridiculous, and your arrogance is befuddling given your ridiculous assumptions (although, it makes sense based on your elitist tone).

[nick417]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Assuming that you're going to do better than median just based on the other schools you got into is REALLY risky. The correlation between UGPA+LSAT to law grades is loose, at best.

The correlation between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades varies from one law school to another (as does the correlation between GPA and first-year law school grades). During 2010, validity studies were conducted for 189 law schools. Correlations between LSAT scores and first-year law school grades ranged from .12 to .56 (median is .36). The correlations between UGPA and first-year law grades ranged from .09 to .45 (median is .28). However, correlations between LSAT scores combined with undergraduate grade-point averages and first-year law school grades ranged from .30 to .62 (median is .48).

http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/your-score/ ... erformance

Think.

All of these studies are irrelevant to my point. Your link references intra-school studies conducted at many different law schools. None of the studies compare, nor could they, students at different law schools. However, it is this inter-school comparison that I am suggesting TLS misses on by a large margin.

Yes, going to Yale and thinking you will finish at the top of the class because you have a 178 and a 4.0 where the average Yalie has a 173 and a 3.9 is risky. But that isn't what I'm suggesting anyone do. What I am suggesting is that if you got into Yale because you had a 179 and a 4.0 but decided to attend the University of New Mexico, it is completely asinine to believe that you only have a 50% chance of becoming a lawyer because "only 50% of UNM students get jobs." I'm shocked that people who take logic tests keep fouling this one up. The average LSAT score at a place like UNM is probably like 153. The types of students that attend UNM is of an entirely different sort than the types of students that attend Notre Dame, let alone T10/T14. And I'm not just talking GPA/LSAT. The total application package will be different, from letters of reference to personal statements. The Yale guy/gal/ringer will not only be one of the brightest people in the class, but also, and much more importantly, this person is going to be one of the hardest workers and greatest strivers. The only way this person graduates from UNM without a job is if they do not seek employment or pick up a felony.

If you ran the fastest time in the nation for a high school student in the 100 meter dash, would assume you would be middle of the pack on the track team of a Division 3 University? But when it comes to academics, the echo chamber tells the 0Ls that law school is the great reset button. It's bullshit. The same smarts and work ethic that got billy and suzy into a T-14 law school doesn't go away when they enroll at the University of New Mexico. Will there be outliers at the lower tiered schools? Of course. I'm sure there are brilliant and hard-working people that go to school everywhere, some of whom probably didn't even bother to apply outside of their home state. But they are the exceptions that highlight the rule, and there is no study to suggest otherwise.

This is completely senseless.

Lets assume your premise that the 179 LSAT and 4.0 student is actually going to a T2 school. Your next assumption is they will excel at this school (or at least be in the top half of the class). Okay, but that doesn't mean they will automatically be in the top 5%. Maybe they mess up, and end up in the top 10 or 15% (I know people at my school with vastly higher LSAT scores than me but vastly below me in terms of law school GPA). The problem is at the T2 school, the options available are vastly different than the options available at Harvard, Yale, or Stanford. Top 10 or 15% at a T2 may not cut it for the cutting edge jobs that pay a lot or have the prestige. Yes the hypothetical student will find a job, but it may be a $50K clerkship or some other $50K per year job. If your argument is whether they WILL find a job, I agree, your logic makes sense. But the type of job available will be vastly different that it would be foolish to even entertain such an idea.

[jrass]

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

It's more that a t-14 wouldn't be placing its grads in New Mexico. New Mexico simply doesn't produce enough commerce to support law firms who would fly around the country looking for the next generation of lawyers. Wasting a million dollars would bankrupt almost all of them. This doesn't mean there's anything wrong with these firms or even that they're less profitable, but if your #1 goal is to work in NM then it's probable that a t-14 will produce less value even at equal price.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Blah blah blah. Also no one is advocating going to one type of school over another. I'm certainly no elitist.

Point remains.

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Cite the irrelevant studies again. See if that works the second time around.

[Tiago Splitter]

Blah blah blah. Also no one is advocating going to one type of school over another. I'm certainly no elitist.

Point remains.

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Cite the irrelevant studies again. See if that works the second time around.

The question is whether even with a 100% chance at a legal job it's the kind of job you actually want. Making "70-80k with less responsibilities" while doing important public interest work is the kind of ridiculous assumption 0L's need to be talked down from. The odds of doing what OP expects are probably much lower than 50-50. The odds of getting any legal job, are, as LRM says, probably much higher than 50-50.

[Cochran]

I don't think there's a lot of freshly minted grads (or old lawyers for that matter) chillin' and kicking back with their relatively cush 70-80K gigs. There's plenty of people (including T14ers and big lawyers) who would jump on those jobs if they were real.

I don't think you really understand what the job market is like (or what you read on TLS for that matter)

They exist, mid sized law firms. Many start ~90k

I shouldn't have said "real" I guess, but what I was thinking about is the availability of these jobs for freshly minted JDs

Are they that rare though? Aren't there more midsized firms than biglaw firms? I work at a firm in a secondary (Non-CA, NYC, Chi) market, and all of the attorneys I work with went from regional T1 to unranked schools. The pay starts ~90k for 1st yr associates and the job seems as cushy as it gets for the legal field. They are rapidly growing, so that may be cause for this, but still. In the entire firm, and from all the offices only 1 attorney is from a T-14 law school. They also hire new associates yearly (most from T-1 but many from a school not even in the T100). Maybe my experience is unique, but many of the midsize firms I interact with seem to be set up in a similar way.

[BigZuck]

I don't think there's a lot of freshly minted grads (or old lawyers for that matter) chillin' and kicking back with their relatively cush 70-80K gigs. There's plenty of people (including T14ers and big lawyers) who would jump on those jobs if they were real.

I don't think you really understand what the job market is like (or what you read on TLS for that matter)

They exist, mid sized law firms. Many start ~90k

I shouldn't have said "real" I guess, but what I was thinking about is the availability of these jobs for freshly minted JDs

Are they that rare though? Aren't there more midsized firms than biglaw firms? I work at a firm in a secondary (Non-CA, NYC, Chi) market, and all of the attorneys I work with went from regional T1 to unranked schools. The pay starts ~90k for 1st yr associates and the job seems as cushy as it gets for the legal field. They are rapidly growing, so that may be cause for this, but still. In the entire firm, and from all the offices only 1 attorney is from a T-14 law school. They also hire new associates yearly (most from T-1 but many from a school not even in the T100). Maybe my experience is unique, but many of the midsize firms I interact with seem to be set up in a similar way.

I don't think any firms like that exist in the secondary market I'm familiar with

Color me skeptical

[Clearly]

I don't think there's a lot of freshly minted grads (or old lawyers for that matter) chillin' and kicking back with their relatively cush 70-80K gigs. There's plenty of people (including T14ers and big lawyers) who would jump on those jobs if they were real.

I don't think you really understand what the job market is like (or what you read on TLS for that matter)

They exist, mid sized law firms. Many start ~90k

I shouldn't have said "real" I guess, but what I was thinking about is the availability of these jobs for freshly minted JDs

Are they that rare though? Aren't there more midsized firms than biglaw firms? I work at a firm in a secondary (Non-CA, NYC, Chi) market, and all of the attorneys I work with went from regional T1 to unranked schools. The pay starts ~90k for 1st yr associates and the job seems as cushy as it gets for the legal field. They are rapidly growing, so that may be cause for this, but still. In the entire firm, and from all the offices only 1 attorney is from a T-14 law school. They also hire new associates yearly (most from T-1 but many from a school not even in the T100). Maybe my experience is unique, but many of the midsize firms I interact with seem to be set up in a similar way.

If true, this is a rare scenario. Again we do have data on this, and it doesn't suggest this is happening en masse. It does show that some earn 90 starting out so it deff happens, but it's rare enough that basing a decision on it is foolish.

[Tiago Splitter]

I don't think there's a lot of freshly minted grads (or old lawyers for that matter) chillin' and kicking back with their relatively cush 70-80K gigs. There's plenty of people (including T14ers and big lawyers) who would jump on those jobs if they were real.

I don't think you really understand what the job market is like (or what you read on TLS for that matter)

They exist, mid sized law firms. Many start ~90k

I shouldn't have said "real" I guess, but what I was thinking about is the availability of these jobs for freshly minted JDs

Are they that rare though? Aren't there more midsized firms than biglaw firms? I work at a firm in a secondary (Non-CA, NYC, Chi) market, and all of the attorneys I work with went from regional T1 to unranked schools. The pay starts ~90k for 1st yr associates and the job seems as cushy as it gets for the legal field. They are rapidly growing, so that may be cause for this, but still. In the entire firm, and from all the offices only 1 attorney is from a T-14 law school. They also hire new associates yearly (most from T-1 but many from a school not even in the T100). Maybe my experience is unique, but many of the midsize firms I interact with seem to be set up in a similar way.

Look at the Class of 2014 summary chart from NALP:

http://www.nalp.org/uploads/NationalSum ... 4Class.pdf

More graduates went to firms of 501+ attorneys than to all firms of 26-500 attorneys. Or put another way, 6000 graduates went to firms of 101+ while just 1800 went to firms of 26-100.

[Lord Randolph McDuff]

Blah blah blah. Also no one is advocating going to one type of school over another. I'm certainly no elitist.

Point remains.

Biggest logical flaw on this website: the student that gets into a T-14 school and decides to attend the Univeristy of New Mexico (fill in the blank T2 school) has a 50% chance of finding a legal job because only 50% of New Mexico graduates were employed in full-time, long-term legal jobs last year.

You need to ask yourself- What percentage of UNM's class of 2015 had the opportunity to attend a T-14 school back in 2012?

Cite the irrelevant studies again. See if that works the second time around.

The question is whether even with a 100% chance at a legal job it's the kind of job you actually want. Making "70-80k with less responsibilities" while doing important public interest work is the kind of ridiculous assumption 0L's need to be talked down from. The odds of doing what OP expects are probably much lower than 50-50. The odds of getting any legal job, are, as LRM says, probably much higher than 50-50.

Agree with this. This is probably what the question should be. But sometimes the question is something like, I got into T-14 and could go into 185k debt or I could go to FSU for 65k debt: what should I do? Fast forward two pages and it's decided that at least going to T-14 will give OP "better than a coin-flips chance at practicing law."

But I agree completely that the 70-80k with less responsibilities is a pipedream for 95% of us.

EDIT: pipedream based on outcomes expected right after you graduate. If you grind with the gov for 5-7 years this salary is expected. DA in Colorado gets you here in like 3 or 4 years in the metro. You can definitely make these 40 hour a week gigs.

[timbs4339]

If you ran the fastest time in the nation for a high school student in the 100 meter dash, would assume you would be middle of the pack on the track team of a Division 3 University? But when it comes to academics, the echo chamber tells the 0Ls that law school is the great reset button. It's bullshit.

The analogy is more like "If you ran the fastest time in the nation for a high school student in the 100 meter dash, would assume you would be middle of the pack at playing running back on your college football team, if for some strange reason the tryout was somehow limited only to people who ran the 100 meter dash in high school."