There are a lot of different ways that students are "set on PI." I was in the PI community at my school, and it was pretty immediately obvious who was actually set on PI and who was "set on PI." I'd bet that >90% of those who were actually set on PI as 1Ls at my school ultimately went into PI, and I can't think of a single person I know who went into PI and isn't still in PI. I think most folks know, as a 0L, which category they fall into--it just requires some honest introspection, because there is a real difference between preferring to go into PI if things shake out right, and knowing that you are definitely going into PI no matter what.LetsGoMets wrote:What others have said, plus being "set on PI" as a 0L is not a good way to make a $300,000 decision, because interests and goals can and do change during school. LRAP is a wonderful tool for students who didn't get money from other schools during the admissions process, and end up going into PI on graduation. Turning down a full-tuition scholarship before beginning school because of presumed access to LRAP for 10 years after graduating from a higher-ranked school is a vastly different calculation, and a poor choice.scone wrote:I've only skimmed the thread (forgive me), so this has probably already been said -- if someone's set on PI, wouldn't H be the obvious choice given their LRAP equivalent? That would be even better than 0 tuition at CLS -- it would be 0 tuition and 0 living costs (and, after 10 years, 0 debt).
For those who are truly set on PI--a group comprising a minority of those who express interest in PI pre-law school--I do think that turning down a full-tuition scholarship because of presumed access to LRAP can be a good decision. (But that's going to depend on what two schools we're talking about and what sort of PI you're interested in.)
