65 Forum

[shotsfired12]

redacted.

[Sandro]

I'm not saying this is 100% correct, but lets look at it this way. A 169 is over GW's 2013 median by 2 points, which makes up for your low 3.2 GPA that is below their 25th. IMO a 171 doesnt make you that much more attractive to GW - you are still bringing their GPA down and boosting their LSAT. A 169 boosts a 167 median the same way a 180 does. Does that mean GW will lavish you with scholarship money ? I would say much less so than an applicant with a very good GPA who boosts their LSAT by ~2 points. Its true an increased score might sneak you into UVA ED or NW ED but I wouldnt bet the house on GW coming up with a ton of money.

How much did you study for the lsat? How many PTs done ? Need some more info before anyone can definitely say retake.

[javancho]

I'm not saying this is 100% correct, but lets look at it this way. A 169 is over GW's 2013 median by 2 points, which makes up for your low 3.2 GPA that is below their 25th. IMO a 171 doesnt make you that much more attractive to GW - you are still bringing their GPA down and boosting their LSAT. A 169 boosts a 167 median the same way a 180 does. Does that mean GW will lavish you with scholarship money ? I would say much less so than an applicant with a very good GPA who boosts their LSAT by ~2 points. Its true an increased score might sneak you into UVA ED or NW ED but I wouldnt bet the house on GW coming up with a ton of money.

How much did you study for the lsat? How many PTs done ? Need some more info before anyone can definitely say retake.

Agree.
Your 3.2 GPA is the killer here. I don't see schools showering you with money even if you improve your LSAT a few points (your likely scenario). If getting a good deal is what you want, and you are willing to take time off, you could drop your standards a bit and move to a state that has an excellent school (Texas, Illi, Minn, Iowa, etc). By doing so, you will pay in-state and, with your numbers, those public schools will also give you scholarship money. Those public schools are not bad, particularly if you consider what you are getting for the (in-state tuition) price.

[javancho]

I got into GW sticker, but I am thinking of deferring a year. My stats are 3.24, 169. Because everyone is saying that GW at sticker is a losing proposition, I am seriously considering retaking the LSAT and aiming for lower T-14. I am hoping that a little bit of added work experience for one year as a fundraising consultant and a better LSAT can help me break through. Worst comes to worst, I will have GW as a my floor. The risks to this plan, IMHO, is that if I don't manage to score high enough or manage to wrestle some money out of GW, I will have wasted a year in terms of beginning my legal career. What do you all think? Additionally, given my situation, what do you think I'll need on the LSAT to crack at least gtown?

Considering how the labor market for lawyers is right now, taking a year off is not a bad idea. I think having a bad career start is much worse than "wasting" a year.

[tea_drinker]

I got into GW sticker, but I am thinking of deferring a year. My stats are 3.24, 169. Because everyone is saying that GW at sticker is a losing proposition, I am seriously considering retaking the LSAT and aiming for lower T-14. I am hoping that a little bit of added work experience for one year as a fundraising consultant and a better LSAT can help me break through. Worst comes to worst, I will have GW as a my floor. The risks to this plan, IMHO, is that if I don't manage to score high enough or manage to wrestle some money out of GW, I will have wasted a year in terms of beginning my legal career. What do you all think? Additionally, given my situation, what do you think I'll need on the LSAT to crack at least gtown?

Prepare to take the June LSAT. If you score 170+, withdraw from GW, and apply early next cycle to T-14 (UVA will probably take you if you apply ED). If June LSAT is not above 170, enjoy foggy bottom.

[BeachandRun23]

I'm not saying this is 100% correct, but lets look at it this way. A 169 is over GW's 2013 median by 2 points, which makes up for your low 3.2 GPA that is below their 25th. IMO a 171 doesnt make you that much more attractive to GW - you are still bringing their GPA down and boosting their LSAT. A 169 boosts a 167 median the same way a 180 does. Does that mean GW will lavish you with scholarship money ? I would say much less so than an applicant with a very good GPA who boosts their LSAT by ~2 points. Its true an increased score might sneak you into UVA ED or NW ED but I wouldnt bet the house on GW coming up with a ton of money.

How much did you study for the lsat? How many PTs done ? Need some more info before anyone can definitely say retake.

Agree.
Your 3.2 GPA is the killer here. I don't see schools showering you with money even if you improve your LSAT a few points (your likely scenario). If getting a good deal is what you want, and you are willing to take time off, you could drop your standards a bit and move to a state that has an excellent school (Texas, Illi, Minn, Iowa, etc). By doing so, you will pay in-state and, with your numbers, those public schools will also give you scholarship money. Those public schools are not bad, particularly if you consider what you are getting for the (in-state tuition) price.

Texas wouldnt touch that GPA but its a good post.

Nevertheless, if you defer a year that is binding. I dont thiink you can tell GW you wnat to defer a year and then drop them next year if/when you get a better accptance. For your plan to work, you would have to withdraw from GW this year and re-apply all over again next year and hope you get in again.

[gwuorbust]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

[Hannibal]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

[JazzOne]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

Once you get a peek at the inside of this profession, it looks a whole lot different. We're not disingenuous. We're giving opinions from a different (and possibly more informed) perspective.

[gwuorbust]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

yes, because $250k in debt is a good life decision when there are limited job prospects. . .

[Hannibal]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

yes, because $250k in debt is a good life decision when there are limited job prospects. . .

There are never guarantees to getting jobs. For a majority of people here, they graduated with a liberal arts degree and have no feasible career. 250k in debt paid over a lifetime with a 50k salary (which out of law school is probable for most grads, but will likely increase overall with more experience) is still significantly better than getting paid $12/hour to be a barista being managed by someone with a business degree from a TTT. That said, disregarding PI and clerkships, only getting a 50/60k job out of GW is a possibility but not the probability.

[gwuorbust]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

yes, because $250k in debt is a good life decision when there are limited job prospects. . .

There are never guarantees to getting jobs. For a majority of people here, they graduated with a liberal arts degree and have no feasible career. 250k in debt paid over a lifetime with a 50k salary (which out of law school is probable for most grads, but will likely increase overall with more experience) is still significantly better than getting paid $12/hour to be a barista being managed by someone with a business degree from a TTT.

while Tulane isn't t-14, it is clearly not TTT. I take serious offense at you saying that in full seriousness. The marginal difference between GW and Tulane is not worth an extra 150k in debt.

and btw, my company actually runs an internship abroad program. you would be amazed at some of the applicants I get from people willing to PAY for my company's internship abroad program. We've had applications from Columbia, NW, GWU, Georgetown. If there are so many jobs why would they be applying to my program??? cause there aren't. there are 50k graduates and 25k legal jobs. those number don't stack up.

will a lot of Tulane grads be screwed? sure. will a lot of gwu grads be screwed. yep. but at least I have less debt.

[javancho]

while I may have gone to gw at sticker had I gotten in, I can assure you it would have been out of stupidity rather than a rational life decision. take a scholarship somewhere else or find a profession where there are actually jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/jobs/ ... .html?_r=1

It's bad in pretty much every field ITE, but when the Class of 2014 is being hired it won't be nearly as bad.

The poor me routine in this forum is pretty pathetic, and clearly disingenuous since those that are saying going to law school is dumb are still planning on going to law school. In your case GW, going to a TTT with a moderate scholarship and telling people not to go to a highly regarded T20.

yes, because $250k in debt is a good life decision when there are limited job prospects. . .

There are never guarantees to getting jobs. For a majority of people here, they graduated with a liberal arts degree and have no feasible career. 250k in debt paid over a lifetime with a 50k salary (which out of law school is probable for most grads, but will likely increase overall with more experience) is still significantly better than getting paid $12/hour to be a barista being managed by someone with a business degree from a TTT. That said, disregarding PI and clerkships, only getting a 50/60k job out of GW is a possibility but not the probability.

No. 250K in debt and a 50K starting salary is a debt-trap from which you can never get out.

[Hannibal]

My use of TTT was slightly sarcastic, and meant to criticize people who call anything below rank 30 or so a bad school. Tulane is a strong school, GW is a great school. In taking your scholarship money, you're more likely to be screwed, but if you are you won't be screwed as bad. That said, the chances of being screwed are still not that big. Becoming a glorified paralegal still comes with a significant salary compared to the alternatives for most here.

[javancho]

My use of TTT was slightly sarcastic, and meant to criticize people who call anything below rank 30 or so a bad school. Tulane is a strong school, GW is a great school. In taking your scholarship money, you're more likely to be screwed, but if you are you won't be screwed as bad. That said, the chances of being screwed are still not that big. Becoming a glorified paralegal still comes with a significant salary compared to the alternatives for most here.

True, but also consider the debt incurred to accomplish that.

[Hannibal]

If I come out making 60k, which is considered a death sentence on TLS, even including loan payments on a theoretical 250k over 30 years (which I won't have), I'll still have more money than I do now.

And I work full time, do not live with my parents.

This is ignoring the fact that you'd almost certainly see a salary increase as you gain experience.

[javancho]

If I come out making 60k, which is considered a death sentence on TLS, even including loan payments on a theoretical 250k over 30 years (which I won't have), I'll still have more money than I do now.

And I work full time, do not live with my parents.

This is ignoring the fact that you'd almost certainly see a salary increase as you gain experience.

Well, let's see:

250K debt for 30 years with a 6.8% interest rate (federal loan) is about 20K/year.
For a 60K salary today, that's about 8.5K in federal taxes, and then about 4.5K in FICA taxes. Let's not forget states income taxes of about 8%, so about 4.8K.

60-8.5-4.5-4.8=42.2 in take home income.

42.2-20 (debt payments not tax-deductible, I believe)=22.2

Probably not a big improvement...
But of course the starting salary can always increase and make the overall investment more worthwhile.

[r6_philly]

Well, let's see:

250K debt for 30 years with a 6.8% interest rate (federal loan) is about 20K/year.
For a 60K salary today, that's about 8.5K in federal taxes, and then about 4.5K in FICA taxes. Let's not forget states income taxes of about 8%, so about 4.8K.

60-8.5-4.5-4.8=42.2 in take home income.

42.2-20 (debt payments not tax-deductible, I believe)=22.2

Probably not a big improvement...
But of course the starting salary can always increase and make the overall investment more worthwhile.

Find a state with lower than 8%. PA is only3%

Some part of the loan debt is deductible (interest) but not much.

IBR will cap the payment at $545/month for single 1 person household making 60k AGI.

[r6_philly]

Wow I played around with IBR calculator, even if I make 180k, $320k combined student loans for my family will have a capped monthly payment of $1700. Wow!

[zonto]

That makes me want to vomit...

[gwuorbust]

That makes me want to vomit...

...?

[shotsfired12]

redacted.