T14 or not at all? Forum

[pav24]

Do current students or any alums agree with this common advice that I've been given that if you aren't attending a T14 school then law school is "commonly not worth it"? I know many tier 1 schools still employ a good amount of graduates so I have made sure to word the quoted part carefully instead of "a complete waste of time" or "rarely useful".

I feel pretty confident in going to some tier 1 midwest schools as I want to work in the midwest and all of the "predictors" think I should safely get in and with a good amount of scholarship money, but these predictors also give me a 25% chance or worse into getting into UChicago, Northwestern or Michigan so I'm in a strange position given the advice I've received. Is taking a year or two off to work and retake the LSAT really worth the bump from say an Illinois or Iowa to a Northwestern or Michigan? If that jump was guaranteed I'm sure the answer would be a resounding yes, but I think improving my LSAT score much more is far from guaranteed. I had not previously been so "down" on the idea of going to a law school like Notre Dame, Indiana or Minnesota, but perusing this forum the past couple days has given me serious reservations.

[NYCFAN1]

Taking a year off is absolutely worth it to get into a t14. There is a huge difference between Illinois and Northwestern/Michigan. You should also get the idea of "Tier 1" out of your head. Outside of the t14, rankings are meaningless.

However, as a student at a t10, I would say no t14 except maybe Yale is worth sticker price if you plan on repaying your loans (i.e. not using loan forgiveness)

[pav24]

Taking a year off is absolutely worth it to get into a t14. There is a huge difference between Illinois and Northwestern/Michigan.

I am aware of the huge difference between those two types of schools, but I am afraid of that year off not guaranteeing the increase in score I would need. And then what?

And also, is there something to be said about barely sneaking into these types of schools? Do you want to go to a place where you very easily could be in the bottom third or quarter of your class? I have commonly read that being in this position in your class makes you very passable for jobs. I have no idea if being bottom quarter at Michigan makes you more or less competitive for jobs than top 10% at say Illinois, but I'm hoping you guys are knowledgeable on that.

[illegallad]

What are your goals OP?

[pav24]

What are your goals OP?

Unfortunately I am pretty unclear as to what type of law specifically I want to specialize in. I just am confident that I want to be a lawyer after my internship this summer at a law firm in Chicago. I was in there finance department (I am a finance major), and after working closely with some of the attorneys and learning more about what they do (most practiced products liability, which intrigued me from the stuff they would let me in on but by no means is for sure what I want to do), being an attorney seems more like what I want to do with the rest of my life as opposed to working in venture capital or investment banking.

All else equal, I would love to be in Chicago (as many midwesterners do), but I would not be sad at all about ending up in somewhere like Indy or Milwaukee or any other major metropolitan area in the midwest. Hope this helps, probably didn't.

[whereskyle]

Dear OP, you should go to a T14, and you should study the LSAT for 300 hours in order to get the score you need.

[NYCFAN1]

Taking a year off is absolutely worth it to get into a t14. There is a huge difference between Illinois and Northwestern/Michigan.

I am aware of the huge difference between those two types of schools, but I am afraid of that year off not guaranteeing the increase in score I would need. And then what?

And also, is there something to be said about barely sneaking into these types of schools? Do you want to go to a place where you very easily could be in the bottom third or quarter of your class? I have commonly read that being in this position in your class makes you very passable for jobs. I have no idea if being bottom quarter at Michigan makes you more or less competitive for jobs than top 10% at say Illinois, but I'm hoping you guys are knowledgeable on that.

worst case scenario you apply with the same score a year from now with a few extra lines on your resume

[Crowing]

Taking a year off is absolutely worth it to get into a t14. There is a huge difference between Illinois and Northwestern/Michigan.

I am aware of the huge difference between those two types of schools, but I am afraid of that year off not guaranteeing the increase in score I would need. And then what?

And also, is there something to be said about barely sneaking into these types of schools? Do you want to go to a place where you very easily could be in the bottom third or quarter of your class? I have commonly read that being in this position in your class makes you very passable for jobs. I have no idea if being bottom quarter at Michigan makes you more or less competitive for jobs than top 10% at say Illinois, but I'm hoping you guys are knowledgeable on that.

What do you mean "and then what?" Law school isn't going anywhere. You're not losing anything by being a year older; if anything it's valuable to have more real-life experience. Meanwhile, you stand to gain tremendously if you improve your score.

It would be much better to be top 10% at Illinois than bottom quarter at Michigan, but that's not a meaningful comparison. If you can make top 10% at Illinois, you'd probably be around there at Mich too. And if you end up bottom quarter at Mich, you'd probably have ended up around there at Illinois as well. There's not that big of a difference in the student bodies.

[twenty]

It really depends on what your goals are. I chose a T1 with a full scholarship over a T20 with a half scholarship and a T14 at sticker, and would make the same decision again in a second. Of course, I had no interest in biglaw/A3/prestigious PI, so the marginal boost a T14 would provide in the fields I'm interested in was not worth putting myself into that much debt.

The obvious answer is to retake the LSAT. At some level, though, you'll invariably find yourself in the position of choosing between a higher ranked school, and a school that offers you more money. For many TLSers, that looks like "UMich/105k vs. UVA/90k." Certainly no one would fault you for that. On the other hand, you may be looking at a full ride from Fordham vs. sticker at UPenn. In that situation, assuming I didn't want biglaw/bigdebt and wanted to practice in the area, I'd probably go with Fordham.

[sprezz]

Do current students or any alums agree with this common advice that I've been given that if you aren't attending a T14 school then law school is "commonly not worth it"? I know many tier 1 schools still employ a good amount of graduates so I have made sure to word the quoted part carefully instead of "a complete waste of time" or "rarely useful".

i personally conceive of "Txx or bust" as a fairly effective shorthand for "hi 0L; you probably don't have a clear enough concept of your own personal goals to warrant going to a non Txx. you may get there at some point, but until then you probably shouldn't matriculate to a law school at all. if you insist on going to law school before you hit that point, you should play it safe and choose a Txx."

I feel pretty confident in going to some tier 1 midwest schools as I want to work in the midwest

good, that's a start. so is "learning more about what attorneys do," but these are still just starts. what do you want to do in the midwest? it sounds like your internship was with a bigger firm. life as an attorney is very different in a big-ish firm than it is in a small one or in government interest work. it is also different in a litigation practice group (sounds like you worked with litigators) than in a corporate practice group. do you know whether you'd like the work in any of the other permutations of lawyer life that you haven't been exposed to? (the answer is probably no - and that's fine! but it's also a reason a year off can help you, because when it's time to get a law job you'll need to be conversant along these themes and people who can sell a story that pre-dates interview season outperform their otherwise similar peers.)

so take your time: what did you like about what they did? why did that seem like a better fit for you than venture capital or investment banking? read different practice group descriptions. that link is slanted toward big-ish firm life, so also read some other sources about what different types of lawyers do; here's a start. they're all going to sound like really subtle variations, and they are. but you'll get a more well rounded idea of what you want to get out of law school, and you'll be able to make a sophisticated decision (like @twenty appears to have made) rather than taking the shortcut ("best midwest school i can get into, GO!")

and all of the "predictors" think I should safely get in and with a good amount of scholarship money, but these predictors also give me a 25% chance or worse into getting into UChicago, Northwestern or Michigan so I'm in a strange position given the advice I've received. Is taking a year or two off to work and retake the LSAT really worth the bump from say an Illinois or Iowa to a Northwestern or Michigan? If that jump was guaranteed I'm sure the answer would be a resounding yes, but I think improving my LSAT score much more is far from guaranteed. I had not previously been so "down" on the idea of going to a law school like Notre Dame, Indiana or Minnesota, but perusing this forum the past couple days has given me serious reservations.

a couple days is again a good start, but as you can see, i think more digging would behoove you. as you can also probably see from my above comments, taking a year makes sense even if your LSAT doesn't go up because that's not the only reason to take a year. the longer you have to figure out what you want to get from law school, the more likely you'll make the right choice.

e.g.#1: if what you like about the firm experience you had stems partly from the size of the firm, you're much less likely to end up in a similar situation coming from ND (~30%) / Ill (~28%) / Indy (~17%) / MN (~16%) than you are from a Mich (~51%) / Duke (~55%) / NW (~57%) / Chi (~64%).

e.g.#2: if you decide you want midwest really badly, that's attainable by going Txx and manufacturing ties in select midwestern cities throughout your year before LS even if the LS you choose is outside the midwest. so you can use this year to network in, say, chicago or indianapolis or whatever: meet attorneys for coffee and ask them for advice on breaking into the market. when you're choosing between LS's, pick their brains over whether one places better into the market or whatever. lay your foundation before LS, and that foundation will help you sell your ties in a market even if you go to LS outside of it.

e.g.#3: maybe you'll find you dgaf about size of firm or salary and what you want is equally attainable through one of the not-Txx's. great! the extra year should help you make that decision confidently - with the added bonus that you can scholarship shop should your LSAT go up and you get some looks from higher schools.

And also, is there something to be said about barely sneaking into these types of schools? Do you want to go to a place where you very easily could be in the bottom third or quarter of your class? I have commonly read that being in this position in your class makes you very passable for jobs. I have no idea if being bottom quarter at Michigan makes you more or less competitive for jobs than top 10% at say Illinois, but I'm hoping you guys are knowledgeable on that.

no. you're overthinking it. how desirable you are as a candidate in admissions doesn't necessarily correspond to how well you do in that LS. you can be the #1 candidate coming into ILL and finish outside of the top third. that's a really bad line of reasoning to follow because as law school desirability goes down, so does the margin for error. falling out of the top third at ILL is almost definitely a worse place to be in than being slightly below median at Mich. the second you walk into a 1L classroom, you're more likely to land at median than anywhere else on the curve. you should choose your school accordingly and not make assumptions based on your pre-LS numbers.

gl, op

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

I chose a full ride at T1 (plus small stipend) over T14 with $50-75k (three offers). I would do it again, and I'm doing NYC big law next year.

[DELG]

I chose a full ride at T1 (plus small stipend) over T14 with $50-75k (three offers). I would do it again, and I'm doing NYC big law next year.

I'd make the same decision again too, tho I took the T14 and the debt. So.

[Lacepiece23]

I chose a full ride at T1 (plus small stipend) over T14 with $50-75k (three offers). I would do it again, and I'm doing NYC big law next year.

Congrats on winning at life. I'm not even being sarcastic at all. That is probably the best possible outcome you could have.

[Johann]

What kinda jobs can you get right now? Why don't you want to use your finance degree? Assuming you are employable you should reconsider law. Most people I know in law would jump at any opportunity to get more on the finance/business side of things.

[FlamingDragon]

OP: This is not a question at all - I am at a T5 right now and the difference between a T14 and 15-X is immeasurable and worth 1 or 2 years easily. Moreover, those programs have more generous LRAP programs, in addition to the infinitely better job prospects. If you are sure you want to be in Chicago, aim for U Chicago or NW, as they run the legal market in the City.

If you want to be in private practice, as it seems you do, I would recommend either going to a T14, going to a T20 with a full-ride as a second option, or not going to law-school.

If you are interested in public interest or government work, the calculus changes somewhat.

[r6_philly]

I chose a full ride at T1 (plus small stipend) over T14 with $50-75k (three offers). I would do it again, and I'm doing NYC big law next year.

I'd make the same decision again too, tho I took the T14 and the debt. So.

If it's picking the difference of maybe 100k vs. greeting straight B+ And still have a decent chance at a biglaw job I'll take the better chance of a job. You make that back in a year vs. not having a big law job. And the T14 degree have better residual value because of the alumni base both in general and particularly the friends you make who are also going to be working in biglaw. I think, in very general terms, what you gain is greater than a NPV of 100k.

[r6_philly]

That said, for OP it's highly dependent on what you want to get out of law school. If you want a biglaw job, T14 is better. If you just want a job, especially if you are in a regional market, go for a regional powerhouse and avoid debt. If you just want a bar license, as some if my friends who will join or take over family practice, then go wherever makes the most sense.

T14 is generally the answer here, but most people here want biglaw jobs.

[hoos89]

Taking a year off is absolutely worth it to get into a t14. There is a huge difference between Illinois and Northwestern/Michigan.

I am aware of the huge difference between those two types of schools, but I am afraid of that year off not guaranteeing the increase in score I would need. And then what?

And also, is there something to be said about barely sneaking into these types of schools? Do you want to go to a place where you very easily could be in the bottom third or quarter of your class? I have commonly read that being in this position in your class makes you very passable for jobs. I have no idea if being bottom quarter at Michigan makes you more or less competitive for jobs than top 10% at say Illinois, but I'm hoping you guys are knowledgeable on that.

You can still very easily get bottom third at non-T14 schools, and you're much more likely to get a job in that position at a t14. Job prospects drop off far more quickly than the quality of the student body. Outside the T14, even being top 3rd is unlikely to get you anything good. Heck, at my T20, you pretty much need top 10-15% to have a chance NYC big law .

[KD35]

I go somewhere significantly lower than T14. There are about three students who got true Biglaw, and only one got it in a major market. The others were in secondary markets near my school's major market.

I also think that when you go to a lower ranked school, you also need to be a better fit personality-wise than someone who goes to a T14. Because the people from lower schools are almost seen as a gamble. So you can be aspie at a T14 and get away with it, but we have a couple high ranked aspie kids here who struck out big time.

Take a year off, retake. Don't hedge your bets on being lucky, coming from someone who got very lucky.

[Elston Gunn]

0L finance major with vague idea he wants to be a lawyer and little/no work experience? You are the exact target audience for this thread. I would seriously considering listening, or at least give yourself more time to have a job and see what you actually want out of life. Most people who go to law school regret it (and this is from someone who doesn't regret it...yet).

[03152016]

OP: This is not a question at all - I am at a T5 right now and the difference between a T14 and 15-X is immeasurable and worth 1 or 2 years easily. Moreover, those programs have more generous LRAP programs, in addition to the infinitely better job prospects. If you are sure you want to be in Chicago, aim for U Chicago or NW, as they run the legal market in the City.

If you want to be in private practice, as it seems you do, I would recommend either going to a T14, going to a T20 with a full-ride as a second option, or not going to law-school.

If you are interested in public interest or government work, the calculus changes somewhat.

"t5" lol
"t20" lol

also, i'm all for people not going to law school, but i think i think the dividing line between T14 and non-T14 isn't so black and white