I'm new to this forum, so my apologies if these questions have been answered elsewhere.
I have been working full time since I graduated UG in January 2010. I fully support myself living in New York City. I am hoping to begin law school next fall or fall 2013. I have some money saved, but nothing substantial.
In addition to grappling with the pros and cons of attending part-time law school over full-time, I don't know what would be best financially as well. I could move back into my parents home in NJ and attend a full-time school, though I would need loans to pay for school entirely. However, I would much rather attend school in another city, preferably at UCLA. Would it be dumb to attend law school full time and pay for rent, bills, etc., when I will be relying entirely on loans?
I could stay at my job and attend part-time in NYC, but the added year seems to off-set what I'd be earning while attending school.
If anyone has any advice or suggestions, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Full-time vs. part-time Forum
-
bk1
- Posts: 20063
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm
Re: Full-time vs. part-time
There are too many variables at play here so I'll try to give a run down:
1. Prestige of the school is important. Going to GULC PT will make it easier to get hired than going to Fordham FT. Going to Fordham PT is going to make it easier to get hired than Rutgers FT. The problem is that there aren't a lot of PT programs and most of them don't offer very good job prospects. The best 3 I can think of off the top of my head are GULC/GW/Fordham. So the problem with going PT in NYC is that there really is only one reputable PT program in NYC (Fordham) and even then whether you should go there PT depends on how much money you make and how much loan debt you would have to take on to pay for Fordham.
2. A lot of people, I would hazard most law students, are using loans to pay for everything. Whether this is a good idea or not depends on the school you are talking about and how risk averse you. Generally speaking it doesn't make sense to pay sticker outside of the top 14 schools or so (except for some state schools that offer very cheap in-state tuition such as Rutgers/UGA/etc). However, if you have a good enough GPA/LSAT you won't have to pay sticker depending on the school. So while it doesn't make sense to pay for UCLA entirely in loan money, if you have a high enough GPA/LSAT combo they will give you a scholarship and if the scholarship is large enough then it would make sense to pay for the rest of it with loan money.
3. Law schools are regional except the top 14 or so. You say you want to attend a school such as UCLA. If you want to work in LA it wouldn't make sense to go to an NY school other than Cornell/Columbia/NYU and no school in NJ would be worth it if you wanted to work in LA.
1. Prestige of the school is important. Going to GULC PT will make it easier to get hired than going to Fordham FT. Going to Fordham PT is going to make it easier to get hired than Rutgers FT. The problem is that there aren't a lot of PT programs and most of them don't offer very good job prospects. The best 3 I can think of off the top of my head are GULC/GW/Fordham. So the problem with going PT in NYC is that there really is only one reputable PT program in NYC (Fordham) and even then whether you should go there PT depends on how much money you make and how much loan debt you would have to take on to pay for Fordham.
2. A lot of people, I would hazard most law students, are using loans to pay for everything. Whether this is a good idea or not depends on the school you are talking about and how risk averse you. Generally speaking it doesn't make sense to pay sticker outside of the top 14 schools or so (except for some state schools that offer very cheap in-state tuition such as Rutgers/UGA/etc). However, if you have a good enough GPA/LSAT you won't have to pay sticker depending on the school. So while it doesn't make sense to pay for UCLA entirely in loan money, if you have a high enough GPA/LSAT combo they will give you a scholarship and if the scholarship is large enough then it would make sense to pay for the rest of it with loan money.
3. Law schools are regional except the top 14 or so. You say you want to attend a school such as UCLA. If you want to work in LA it wouldn't make sense to go to an NY school other than Cornell/Columbia/NYU and no school in NJ would be worth it if you wanted to work in LA.
-
tinydancer
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 3:16 pm
Re: Full-time vs. part-time
thank you for the feedback
