Big debt/big school vs low debt/non-ranked school for 45 y/o Forum

[aurdie]

So here is my deal. A little background to take into consideration with my dilemma- I am a non-traditional (over 30 years of age) law student. I have a husband and one small child, but do not work … thus allowing me the be a full-time student. I have zero desire to try to break into Big Law (good thing, at my age !), I am interested in Elder Law, Public Interest Law & Juveniile Law. I’d like to work in a small partnership and eventually open my own practice. At 46 years old, I will be nearly 50 when I graduate. My concern is the financial trade-off of a law school ( Northern Illinois University) that is considered to be non-ranked, but is strong in government and public interest law that is half the cost of a bigger name player. On one hand, leaving law school with under 60K in debt is very attractive… since no one is going to be beating down my door to hire a new attorney that is middle aged. OTOH, DePaul and Kent cost double, but seem to have a better network of alumni. More expensive, but with a more well-known school, upon graduation, maybe I’ll be able to secure a higher paying job, and pay off the higher $$ loan more quickly. Any thoughts, or advice ? Especially from other “non-traditional” students. Thanks in advance, I appreciate all comments.

[MKC]

So here is my deal. A little background to take into consideration with my dilemma- I am a non-traditional (over 30 years of age) law student. I have a husband and one small child, but do not work … thus allowing me the be a full-time student. I have zero desire to try to break into Big Law (good thing, at my age !), I am interested in Elder Law, Public Interest Law & Juveniile Law. I’d like to work in a small partnership and eventually open my own practice. At 46 years old, I will be nearly 50 when I graduate. My concern is the financial trade-off of a law school ( Northern Illinois University) that is considered to be non-ranked, but is strong in government and public interest law that is half the cost of a bigger name player. On one hand, leaving law school with under 60K in debt is very attractive… since no one is going to be beating down my door to hire a new attorney that is middle aged. OTOH, DePaul and Kent cost double, but seem to have a better network of alumni. More expensive, but with a more well-known school, upon graduation, maybe I’ll be able to secure a higher paying job, and pay off the higher $$ loan more quickly. Any thoughts, or advice ? Especially from other “non-traditional” students. Thanks in advance, I appreciate all comments.

If these are the choices available to you, then the correct answer is retake. You have the time and the resources to do so. There is no reason for you to pay for law school. 6 months (more likely 3) of studying for the LSAT correctly is almost guaranteed to cover three years of tuition at a decent school.

[AAJD2B]

Aurdie, if these are your only three options and you must go to law school, then go with the cheapest school. Despite Depaul's and Kent's higher ranking, they are not going to be worth the double price-tag. The employment figures at these schools are unimpressive. It is highly unlikely you will secure a high-paying job from these schools.

Please do some further research on IL placements by school here:

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?r=il

You will note that the employment score for Northern Illinois is better than DePaul and only slightly lower than Kent. The extra loans will not be worth it here.

[El Principe]

So here is my deal. A little background to take into consideration with my dilemma- I am a non-traditional (over 30 years of age) law student. I have a husband and one small child, but do not work … thus allowing me the be a full-time student. I have zero desire to try to break into Big Law (good thing, at my age !), I am interested in Elder Law, Public Interest Law & Juveniile Law. I’d like to work in a small partnership and eventually open my own practice. At 46 years old, I will be nearly 50 when I graduate. My concern is the financial trade-off of a law school ( Northern Illinois University) that is considered to be non-ranked, but is strong in government and public interest law that is half the cost of a bigger name player. On one hand, leaving law school with under 60K in debt is very attractive… since no one is going to be beating down my door to hire a new attorney that is middle aged. OTOH, DePaul and Kent cost double, but seem to have a better network of alumni. More expensive, but with a more well-known school, upon graduation, maybe I’ll be able to secure a higher paying job, and pay off the higher $$ loan more quickly. Any thoughts, or advice ? Especially from other “non-traditional” students. Thanks in advance, I appreciate all comments.

If these are the choices available to you, then the correct answer is retake. You have the time and the resources to do so. There is no reason for you to pay for law school. 6 months (more likely 3) of studying for the LSAT correctly is almost guaranteed to cover three years of tuition at a decent school.

+1

While 60K normally isn't a bad debt load for someone with relatively modest goals going to a T1/2, I wouldn't want to spend anything at all if I planned on going to an unranked school with the expectation that I'll be working for a small firm or hanging my own shingle.

And keep in mind, I'm not necessarily a "T14 or die/Biglaw or bust" type person here, but there's honestly not much incentive to attend this year if the difference between those offers in your hand and a full scholarship is just a few points away.

Retake.

That being said, if you're insistent on doing it now, take the cheaper option. There isn't any reason to get in 120k worth of debt for marginally better employment statistics.

[StillCutty]

mom, you need to retake.

crush the LSAT, get law school paid for, set the bar for junior when he/she is looking at college.

my mom went back to school at about your age when I was in high school. Knowing that she had studied hard for the admissions test, smashed it, and then went to school for free lit the fire under my rear to perform.

maybe i'm just a momma's boy though

[Black_Swan]

So here is my deal. A little background to take into consideration with my dilemma- I am a non-traditional (over 30 years of age) law student. I have a husband and one small child, but do not work … thus allowing me the be a full-time student. I have zero desire to try to break into Big Law (good thing, at my age !), I am interested in Elder Law, Public Interest Law & Juveniile Law. I’d like to work in a small partnership and eventually open my own practice. At 46 years old, I will be nearly 50 when I graduate. My concern is the financial trade-off of a law school ( Northern Illinois University) that is considered to be non-ranked, but is strong in government and public interest law that is half the cost of a bigger name player. On one hand, leaving law school with under 60K in debt is very attractive… since no one is going to be beating down my door to hire a new attorney that is middle aged. OTOH, DePaul and Kent cost double, but seem to have a better network of alumni. More expensive, but with a more well-known school, upon graduation, maybe I’ll be able to secure a higher paying job, and pay off the higher $$ loan more quickly. Any thoughts, or advice ? Especially from other “non-traditional” students. Thanks in advance, I appreciate all comments.

If these are the choices available to you, then the correct answer is retake. You have the time and the resources to do so. There is no reason for you to pay for law school. 6 months (more likely 3) of studying for the LSAT correctly is almost guaranteed to cover three years of tuition at a decent school.

Retake. No rush in your case. Please Retake.
Only take a full ride or very close to that. Good luck!

[aurdie]

Thanks to all of you for your responses. I really appreciate it. Based on my undergrad GPA ( I just graduated May 2013) of 4.0 , most of the schools have already offered me about a 50% discount. I'm just wondering, realistically, even if I improve my score (unrealistically!) by 10 points...how much more money they are going to offer. I self-studied for the LSAT and did okay on sample LSAC LSAT exams...but I had the flu when I took the LSAT and scored only about 155. Did pretty well on all sections except games.... of which there were TWO (experimental exam). Quite honestly, even without the flu, I don't know how much better (even with intensive studying) I would fare on the games portion of the exam. And meanwhile, interest rates on the federal loans will likely increase. And I inch closer to becoming a senior citizen Thanks again for all of the constructive comments. ..I've got some thinking to do, I guess!

[objctnyrhnr]

Thanks to all of you for your responses. I really appreciate it. Based on my undergrad GPA ( I just graduated May 2013) of 4.0 , most of the schools have already offered me about a 50% discount. I'm just wondering, realistically, even if I improve my score (unrealistically!) by 10 points...how much more money they are going to offer. I self-studied for the LSAT and did okay on sample LSAC LSAT exams...but I had the flu when I took the LSAT and scored only about 155. Did pretty well on all sections except games.... of which there were TWO (experimental exam). Quite honestly, even without the flu, I don't know how much better (even with intensive studying) I would fare on the games portion of the exam. And meanwhile, interest rates on the federal loans will likely increase. And I inch closer to becoming a senior citizen Thanks again for all of the constructive comments. ..I've got some thinking to do, I guess!

Wow. You have a 4.0 gpa and you are considering going to an unranked school? AND YOU HAD THE FLU WHEN YOU GOT YOUR LSAT SCORE? This is an absolute no-brainer. You should be going to a t2 for free, at the least.

Somebody back me up here.

[HorseThief]

Thanks to all of you for your responses. I really appreciate it. Based on my undergrad GPA ( I just graduated May 2013) of 4.0 , most of the schools have already offered me about a 50% discount. I'm just wondering, realistically, even if I improve my score (unrealistically!) by 10 points...how much more money they are going to offer. I self-studied for the LSAT and did okay on sample LSAC LSAT exams...but I had the flu when I took the LSAT and scored only about 155. Did pretty well on all sections except games.... of which there were TWO (experimental exam). Quite honestly, even without the flu, I don't know how much better (even with intensive studying) I would fare on the games portion of the exam. And meanwhile, interest rates on the federal loans will likely increase. And I inch closer to becoming a senior citizen Thanks again for all of the constructive comments. ..I've got some thinking to do, I guess!

[Backing up objct]

You definitely need to retake, because that 155 is not representative of your true potential. Between the flu and 2 LG sections, you should be able to clear 160 and maybe even get up around 170.

Keep in mind that the logic games are the most learnable aspect of the test. If you need to, find someone who will tutor you in the games. Paying $500 or $1000 now so that you don't have to pay for law school is a very reasonable investment.

[T+3]

OP, considering your age, UG GPA, LSAT, & currently not working, the absolute best advice I have for you is to either retake or do not attend law school. Strongly worded advice but I feel confident this is the correct answer. If you aren't going -0 on LGs then you have plenty of room to grow. I'm not as "non-traditional" as you, out of UG for 5-9 years, but I self studied and went from a cold diagnostic of 142 and finished with a 169 all while working 60+ hours. Don't sell yourself short, get 170+ and go to whatever school you want to, likely several options will be free.

[MKC]

Thanks to all of you for your responses. I really appreciate it. Based on my undergrad GPA ( I just graduated May 2013) of 4.0 , most of the schools have already offered me about a 50% discount. I'm just wondering, realistically, even if I improve my score (unrealistically!) by 10 points...how much more money they are going to offer. I self-studied for the LSAT and did okay on sample LSAC LSAT exams...but I had the flu when I took the LSAT and scored only about 155. Did pretty well on all sections except games.... of which there were TWO (experimental exam). Quite honestly, even without the flu, I don't know how much better (even with intensive studying) I would fare on the games portion of the exam. And meanwhile, interest rates on the federal loans will likely increase. And I inch closer to becoming a senior citizen Thanks again for all of the constructive comments. ..I've got some thinking to do, I guess!

For perspective:

First take: -13 LG
Second take: -1 LG

I assure you, those games are learnable.

[whereskyle]

Thanks to all of you for your responses. I really appreciate it. Based on my undergrad GPA ( I just graduated May 2013) of 4.0 , most of the schools have already offered me about a 50% discount. I'm just wondering, realistically, even if I improve my score (unrealistically!) by 10 points...how much more money they are going to offer. I self-studied for the LSAT and did okay on sample LSAC LSAT exams...but I had the flu when I took the LSAT and scored only about 155. Did pretty well on all sections except games.... of which there were TWO (experimental exam). Quite honestly, even without the flu, I don't know how much better (even with intensive studying) I would fare on the games portion of the exam. And meanwhile, interest rates on the federal loans will likely increase. And I inch closer to becoming a senior citizen Thanks again for all of the constructive comments. ..I've got some thinking to do, I guess!

For perspective:

First take: -13 LG
Second take: -1 LG

I assure you, those games are learnable.

170 scorer here. Started with a 159: -13 on Games. Studied the games for 2-3 months: -1 on the games. Now, I'm going to Northwestern with a full scholly. You could be me.

[logicspeaks]

I guess I'll also chime in to help make the point. I scored 160 in December with -13 on games. I studied almost nothing but games until the February test (nondisclosed) and scored a 171 when most people were adamant that the games section was the hardest they'd ever seen.

Study games and you can see a dramatic improvement.

[SemperLegal]

I got killed on the games as well, but with a formal practice system (paid or through books) you can easily pick up 7-10 points just by using methodical systems that they suggest. With a non-traditional background, a 4.0, and a mid-sixties LSAT, you can be back here next year asking if you should Full-ride at lower T1 or take partial scholly in the T50.

If you really cram (i.e. month(s) of full time prep work, you will be looking at some schollies from T14)

Also, I'm guessing family issues keep you in Chicago, in which case your reach goal should 100% be NU early decision, with the associated scholly and "oldie" bump.

[whereskyle]

I got killed on the games as well, but with a formal practice system (paid or through books) you can easily pick up 7-10 points just by using methodical systems that they suggest. With a non-traditional background, a 4.0, and a mid-sixties LSAT, you can be back here next year asking if you should Full-ride at lower T1 or take partial scholly in the T50.

If you really cram (i.e. month(s) of full time prep work, you will be looking at some schollies from T14)

Also, I'm guessing family issues keep you in Chicago, in which case your reach goal should 100% be NU early decision, with the associated scholly and "oldie" bump.

Do it.

[Mr. Frodo]

While we are boosting confidences, I started with a 146 and got over 170 on the real deal. Anything is possible.

[kenwash]

If you're considering Kent, I received a full scholarship with a lower GPA and a LSAT in the high 160s. Took the test twice before and scored in the 150s. Definitely retake.

[L’Étranger]

I think this thread is going in the wrong direction with the retake advice.

Retake is the right advice for many posters on this site. However, given the original poster's stated goals, going to an unranked school at a relatively low cost that might help her achieve her goals is not a terrible option.

Additionally, the opportunity costs of a missed year of productivity increase as one gets older. So, retake at 22 from an opportunity cost standpoint, makes total sense, while retake at 45+ probably makes less sense.

[lakers180]

lol mrs. op,

you could be going to harvard with that gpa, spend half a year studying and retake for that 170+

[HorseThief]

I think this thread is going in the wrong direction with the retake advice.

Retake is the right advice for many posters on this site. However, given the original poster's stated goals, going to an unranked school at a relatively low cost that might help her achieve her goals is not a terrible option.

Additionally, the opportunity costs of a missed year of productivity increase as one gets older. So, retake at 22 from an opportunity cost standpoint, makes total sense, while retake at 45+ probably makes less sense.

Is that extra year of work worth $90k (or however much debt OP might take on with her current LSAT)? The wisest financial decision is to retake.