Chicago: Kent, DePaul, John Marshall and Loyola Forum

[hasmith]

I'm hoping that there is a kent student out there who can answer this for me.

I just got in and one of the stipulations of my scholarship is that I keep a 3.25 GPA. They say that this is like the top 25-30%.
i was just wondering if grading is harsh because that seems a bit low and i was also you could let me know how difficult it is to maintain this GPA.

Thanks

Those numbers are accurate. Kent's first year curve is available here --LinkRemoved--

A B+ is a 3.3 so you have to get pretty close to straight B+ grades on all your exams.

[Snape]

It is an EXTREMELY bad idea to pay even half tuition at any of those schools! VERY VERY VERY bad idea....if you like Chicago then you might as well just take that money and go to the Horseshoe and plya blackjack....at least then you have a chance at doubling your money....at those schools you have about a 0-5% chance of getting a job worth anything after graduation--otherwise in three years all that you wish is that you could have gone to NU/Chi?mich/Harvard...and the schools that get jobs in chicago--not even U of I/WUSTL/ND?WI are even very good options any more

[BarbellDreams]

Thats a rough stipulation, I wouldn't risk it.

To the OP, PM me with questions about this, judging by the screen name I assume you go to Loyola undergrad and if so I can talk you through some options (I went to Loyola for undergrad, for all I know we may know each other).

[mimi82]

I'm a legal recruiter in Chicago; the majority of recent grads from Chicago T2 are doing doc review right now if they can get hired (right now the going rate for doc review is $28 an hour, and everybody is doing it. I have new grads, the 2008 BigLaw layoffs, solo practitioners whose work has dried up, and all the in-house layoffs as well.) All that competition for a $28 an hour position--it's sometimes very hard to go to work some mornings. New grads aren't just competing against new grads--they're competing against everybody else who lost a job as well. I get people from NU and UChi asking for contract work--even they've been hit hard.

I agree with the rest of the thread--the available positions in Chicago are often swept up by the higher ranked Chicago schools, and other Midwestern schools that feed into the Chicago market b/c their own market has dried up. Now I have seen grads finding work out of Kent, Loyola, and DePaul, but they are definitely few and far between, and the going rate to start has been around 40k a year. If you want to go, fine, but PLEASE, do not pay sticker.

Thanks for your input. Really gives a different perspective. I was just accepted into Loyola's part time program. Currently I live in DC, work with the Dept of State in criminal research. I'm 28 now and have been working here for about 7 years in various other positions including other aspects of investigations. I applied to this school because I wanted to leave DC and I've heard Chicago was a nice city. But now reading this has me nervous. My question is does it make a difference for someone coming out of Loyola law school with years of work experience to get a legal position upon graduation? I mean there is no way in hell I'm taking anything starting at 40k.

[mimi82]

Also does being an URM make a difference in recruitment? I was reading somewhere that there is a somewhat advantage if your top 25% of your class rather than the bottom, which would make no difference. Thanks.

[BarbellDreams]

WE will certainly help, but if you firmly have the "No way in hell I am taking 40k starting" mentality then I would avoid all non T30 schools. People are fighting for those 40k jobs right now so if you have a problem with those I suggest aiming at T30's to put yourself in a better position to land jobs that pay more.

[Snape]

If there is "no way in hell" youd take 40K then there is no way in hell that you should even think about Loyola--half of their grads are pleading and beggining for 40K legal work...time to reconsider your options...work expereince may give you a half percentage better chance at a job but what firms or good PI want in chicago is NU, Chicago, MICh, harvard, yale, stanford....then notre dame, u of I, WUSTl, WIsco, Iowa, indiana, minn, and about 10 others schools....then the best (5-10%) full time students at loyola and kent....then you may have a shot at an interview once they are done with all of those candidates in a very saturated market.

[BarbellDreams]

Basically in this legal market if you're upset with a 40k job I wouldn't go anywhere outside the T14+UT+Vandy. 0L's keep thinking these magical 75k+ jobs are all over the place, but they are long gone unless you are at LEAST in the top 10% of the class, and even then nothing is close to guaranteed, you just have a shot at it. You just need to read up on the legal market more and you'l realize exactly what I am talking about. As a current 1L with very good grades I am PRAYING that I have a 40k job guaranteed to me, thats how bad it is.

[mimi82]

While I appreciate everyones opinion I really only wanted to hear what the recruiter had to say. They have a better/realistic picture of the situation. Most folks on this forum were very opinionated on what schools I wouldn't have a chance at and for the most part they were all wrong. So I say this to the young college kid going straight to law school from undergrad with absolutely no work experience 'I don't want your opinion.' I can only deal with facts that come from ppl who have experienced it.

Also I make 65k now in my job...I'm going to law school to reach the next level in my field not to start over again. I'm already in my dream job...but I need to climb the leadership ladder and most folks at the top in my field have a JD.

[lolschool2011]

While I appreciate everyones opinion I really only wanted to hear what the recruiter had to say. They have a better/realistic picture of the situation. Most folks on this forum were very opinionated on what schools I wouldn't have a chance at and for the most part they were all wrong. So I say this to the young college kid going straight to law school from undergrad with absolutely no work experience 'I don't want your opinion.' I can only deal with facts that come from ppl who have experienced it.

Also I make 65k now in my job...I'm going to law school to reach the next level in my field not to start over again. I'm already in my dream job...but I need to climb the leadership ladder and most folks at the top in my field have a JD.

There is so much uncredited response on TLS it's ridiculous... especially when it comes to future earning projections, average salaries, etc. I also have a ton of WE, am 30+ years old, and do not care a lick about what some pimply faced UG 0L thinks the probable salary post-graduation of any LS is. If you live in adult land... you'd know most of the advancement in your professional career is predicated on your ability to network, amongst other things that are almost never mentioned here. Even if I went the absolute bottom TTTT, I'd spin it to my advantage somehow and secure a higher salary than someone who relies on the ridiculously antiquated notion of "school prestige." Uh, we sort of live in an "information age" and schools are all selling you the same "information," laws, etc. YOU are the determining factor of what you eventually achieve in life, not your school. Note: I've been over six figures in my professional life for over 7 years now... will probably go to Loyola Chi, and will continue making at least that or more during and post JD. Done.

[lolschool2011]

It's tempting to look at practicing lawyers from DePaul, etc, and think "oh they did fine" but it's really important to realize that they entered the legal market at a very different time.

Take the Class of 1991. This is a good sample because (a) we have data for them, and (b) they are now senior and experienced attorneys in their early-mid 40s, but still went to school in roughly contemporary times. They had the USNWR rankings, the T14 existed, etc.

If you look at page 3 of this data: --LinkRemoved--
These folks paid about $32,000 in tuition over the three years from 1988-1991.

Now, extrapolating that data for people who will start school next year (are applying this year) and you can estimate a total tuition of about $127,000.

Meanwhile, let's look at starting salaries.

Class of '91:


Class of '06 (salaries today aren't much if at all higher because they've flat-lined in the recession):


Don't just look at the stated medians, but look at that big hump near the bottom. That's representative of the starting salary at small firms. It's moved up from about $30k in 1991 to about $45k today.

Now compare the debt loads. The Class of '91 guy will have a monthly student loan payment of about $440. Your monthly payment will be about $1540.

Does your increased salary cover the difference? Of course not. Assuming say 25% taxes, their take-home was about $1875/mo, minus $440 in loan payments, leaving them with $1435/mo. Your take-home will be about $2800/mo, minus $1540 in loan payments, leaving you with $1260/mo.

That doesn't seem like a huge difference until you realize that the former is denominated in '91 dollars. $1435 from '91 has the buying power of about $2250 today. There is a big difference in lifestyle between having $1260/mo to cover your rent, food, etc and having $2250/mo.

Re: life-ending, I wouldn't go that far. If you can get a job at a small firm (though that's a big 'if' in today's economy) you will at some point start making more money. It's just that the previous generation of lawyers graduated and even after servicing their debt they were making livable money. That's just not true anymore.

I would note that the same is really true for big lawyers. That guy from C/O '91 bringing home $85/year was probably taking home a bit more, adjusted for tax brackets and student loan payments, as the guy from C/O '09 making $160k/year.

TL; DR

I have 2 friends that graduated from Kent, 3 from Depaul and 1 from Loyola. Out of those 6, all of them are making over 100k. They're all assertive and network well. Graphs/statistics are sometimes useless... and most often the result of someone trying to feel that they have some semblance of "control" over an outcome. The bottom line is there are no guarantees in life, and the ones that typically win are those who spend more time hustling, and less time creating, analyzing and interpreting graphs.

[Kilpatrick]

It's tempting to look at practicing lawyers from DePaul, etc, and think "oh they did fine" but it's really important to realize that they entered the legal market at a very different time.

Take the Class of 1991. This is a good sample because (a) we have data for them, and (b) they are now senior and experienced attorneys in their early-mid 40s, but still went to school in roughly contemporary times. They had the USNWR rankings, the T14 existed, etc.

If you look at page 3 of this data: --LinkRemoved--
These folks paid about $32,000 in tuition over the three years from 1988-1991.

Now, extrapolating that data for people who will start school next year (are applying this year) and you can estimate a total tuition of about $127,000.

Meanwhile, let's look at starting salaries.

Class of '91:


Class of '06 (salaries today aren't much if at all higher because they've flat-lined in the recession):


Don't just look at the stated medians, but look at that big hump near the bottom. That's representative of the starting salary at small firms. It's moved up from about $30k in 1991 to about $45k today.

Now compare the debt loads. The Class of '91 guy will have a monthly student loan payment of about $440. Your monthly payment will be about $1540.

Does your increased salary cover the difference? Of course not. Assuming say 25% taxes, their take-home was about $1875/mo, minus $440 in loan payments, leaving them with $1435/mo. Your take-home will be about $2800/mo, minus $1540 in loan payments, leaving you with $1260/mo.

That doesn't seem like a huge difference until you realize that the former is denominated in '91 dollars. $1435 from '91 has the buying power of about $2250 today. There is a big difference in lifestyle between having $1260/mo to cover your rent, food, etc and having $2250/mo.

Re: life-ending, I wouldn't go that far. If you can get a job at a small firm (though that's a big 'if' in today's economy) you will at some point start making more money. It's just that the previous generation of lawyers graduated and even after servicing their debt they were making livable money. That's just not true anymore.

I would note that the same is really true for big lawyers. That guy from C/O '91 bringing home $85/year was probably taking home a bit more, adjusted for tax brackets and student loan payments, as the guy from C/O '09 making $160k/year.

TL; DR

I have 2 friends that graduated from Kent, 3 from Depaul and 1 from Loyola. Out of those 6, all of them are making over 100k. They're all assertive and network well. Graphs/statistics are sometimes useless... and most often the result of someone trying to feel that they have some semblance of "control" over an outcome. The bottom line is there are no guarantees in life, and the ones that typically win are those who spend more time hustling, and less time creating, analyzing and interpreting graphs.

Yeah statistics are totally useless when you've got anecdotal evidence! Obviously everybody can go to Loyola and get a six figure salary because you know one person who did it.

[lolschool2011]

It's tempting to look at practicing lawyers from DePaul, etc, and think "oh they did fine" but it's really important to realize that they entered the legal market at a very different time.

Take the Class of 1991. This is a good sample because (a) we have data for them, and (b) they are now senior and experienced attorneys in their early-mid 40s, but still went to school in roughly contemporary times. They had the USNWR rankings, the T14 existed, etc.

If you look at page 3 of this data: --LinkRemoved--
These folks paid about $32,000 in tuition over the three years from 1988-1991.

Now, extrapolating that data for people who will start school next year (are applying this year) and you can estimate a total tuition of about $127,000.

Meanwhile, let's look at starting salaries.

Class of '91:


Class of '06 (salaries today aren't much if at all higher because they've flat-lined in the recession):


Don't just look at the stated medians, but look at that big hump near the bottom. That's representative of the starting salary at small firms. It's moved up from about $30k in 1991 to about $45k today.

Now compare the debt loads. The Class of '91 guy will have a monthly student loan payment of about $440. Your monthly payment will be about $1540.

Does your increased salary cover the difference? Of course not. Assuming say 25% taxes, their take-home was about $1875/mo, minus $440 in loan payments, leaving them with $1435/mo. Your take-home will be about $2800/mo, minus $1540 in loan payments, leaving you with $1260/mo.

That doesn't seem like a huge difference until you realize that the former is denominated in '91 dollars. $1435 from '91 has the buying power of about $2250 today. There is a big difference in lifestyle between having $1260/mo to cover your rent, food, etc and having $2250/mo.

Re: life-ending, I wouldn't go that far. If you can get a job at a small firm (though that's a big 'if' in today's economy) you will at some point start making more money. It's just that the previous generation of lawyers graduated and even after servicing their debt they were making livable money. That's just not true anymore.

I would note that the same is really true for big lawyers. That guy from C/O '91 bringing home $85/year was probably taking home a bit more, adjusted for tax brackets and student loan payments, as the guy from C/O '09 making $160k/year.

TL; DR

I have 2 friends that graduated from Kent, 3 from Depaul and 1 from Loyola. Out of those 6, all of them are making over 100k. They're all assertive and network well. Graphs/statistics are sometimes useless... and most often the result of someone trying to feel that they have some semblance of "control" over an outcome. The bottom line is there are no guarantees in life, and the ones that typically win are those who spend more time hustling, and less time creating, analyzing and interpreting graphs.

Yeah statistics are totally useless when you've got anecdotal evidence! Obviously everybody can go to Loyola and get a six figure salary because you know one person who did it.

meh. i make my own statistics.

[SMA22]

To the OP, feel free to PM me, and I'd be happy to answer any of your questions about the Chicago market.

Also, I do agree that you are what you make of your networking and educational opportunities, but what worked in Chicago a few years ago isn't working as well today. The unemployed graduates or layoffs are not lazy, stupid, or lacking in social skills--they are simply up against some serious competition right now for a limited number of positions. In no way do I want to tell a candidate "don't go to law school, as you'll never make it." I do ask that before someone moves to Chicago, takes out student loans, and prepares for the future that they make a realistic assessment of what the market is like right now. Best of luck to you.

[BarbellDreams]

This thread is entertaining to say the least.

Statistics are based on loads and loads of data while a few examples of "friends" that made it before the economy crashed aren't really anything. I am not a 0L undergrad, I am a 1L law student at the top of my class and I can tell you unless you're going to a t14 you have no guarantees at a job whatsoever. If you have connections that can 100% get you a job as soon as you have a JD then why even consider Loyola when John Marshall will give you close to fulride and you'll still get the job (assuming it really is "guaranteed").

For every 0L on TLS that bitches about stuff they don't understand there is one that actually provides useful info. When I was a 0L I was on TLS a lot and after fighting about it for a while and telling everyone they don't know what they are talking about, that DePaul's median salary is 100k, and that I have a friend who went there in the 2006 class who makes 100k I finally realized they were all right and I was wrong. I am in the real world, I am currently in law school (procrastinating reading property to type this actually), and I can tell you that 1. TLS knowledge really helped me excel in law school and pick the right school and 2. If you go to a T2 like Loyola in that market, with that competition, and without rock solid connections that for sure will get you a job you're gonna get absolutely rocked unless you're top 10% at the very least. .02 from someone who is living it.

[lolschool2011]

This thread is entertaining to say the least.

Statistics are based on loads and loads of data while a few examples of "friends" that made it before the economy crashed aren't really anything. I am not a 0L undergrad, I am a 1L law student at the top of my class and I can tell you unless you're going to a t14 you have no guarantees at a job whatsoever. If you have connections that can 100% get you a job as soon as you have a JD then why even consider Loyola when John Marshall will give you close to fulride and you'll still get the job (assuming it really is "guaranteed").

For every 0L on TLS that bitches about stuff they don't understand there is one that actually provides useful info. When I was a 0L I was on TLS a lot and after fighting about it for a while and telling everyone they don't know what they are talking about, that DePaul's median salary is 100k, and that I have a friend who went there in the 2006 class who makes 100k I finally realized they were all right and I was wrong. I am in the real world, I am currently in law school (procrastinating reading property to type this actually), and I can tell you that 1. TLS knowledge really helped me excel in law school and pick the right school and 2. If you go to a T2 like Loyola in that market, with that competition, and without rock solid connections that for sure will get you a job you're gonna get absolutely rocked unless you're top 10% at the very least. .02 from someone who is living it.

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless. I'm not saying it's without risk... everything is a risk. If there's another near depression level financial collapse in the next 3-4 years, even my fallback plan would be compromised. (intend to do PT JD, and stay w/current company during the day) With that said, as I posted in THE DING BAR earlier, that Harvey guy that runs that despicable celeb-garbage show/site got his JD from University of Chicago and has become a "success" in a completely unrelated field. He credits his JD as being the "transformative" step in his life, and one which taught him skills that he was able to apply in everything he has ever done since. The guy is a douche, but his message is, nevertheless, legit. I would never regret getting a JD, even if I end up staying in my current field afterwards.

[BarbellDreams]

This thread is entertaining to say the least.

Statistics are based on loads and loads of data while a few examples of "friends" that made it before the economy crashed aren't really anything. I am not a 0L undergrad, I am a 1L law student at the top of my class and I can tell you unless you're going to a t14 you have no guarantees at a job whatsoever. If you have connections that can 100% get you a job as soon as you have a JD then why even consider Loyola when John Marshall will give you close to fulride and you'll still get the job (assuming it really is "guaranteed").

For every 0L on TLS that bitches about stuff they don't understand there is one that actually provides useful info. When I was a 0L I was on TLS a lot and after fighting about it for a while and telling everyone they don't know what they are talking about, that DePaul's median salary is 100k, and that I have a friend who went there in the 2006 class who makes 100k I finally realized they were all right and I was wrong. I am in the real world, I am currently in law school (procrastinating reading property to type this actually), and I can tell you that 1. TLS knowledge really helped me excel in law school and pick the right school and 2. If you go to a T2 like Loyola in that market, with that competition, and without rock solid connections that for sure will get you a job you're gonna get absolutely rocked unless you're top 10% at the very least. .02 from someone who is living it.

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless. I'm not saying it's without risk... everything is a risk. If there's another near depression level financial collapse in the next 3-4 years, even my fallback plan would be compromised. (intend to do PT JD, and stay w/current company during the day) With that said, as I posted in THE DING BAR earlier, that Harvey guy that runs that despicable celeb-garbage show/site got his JD from University of Chicago and has become a "success" in a completely unrelated field. He credits his JD as being the "transformative" step in his life, and one which taught him skills that he was able to apply in everything he has ever done since. The guy is a douche, but his message is, nevertheless, legit. I would never regret getting a JD, even if I end up staying in my current field afterwards.

As long as you have a realistic sense of how the market REALLY is I have no problem with your position. A JD always looks good on a resume no matter what you do. Just realize the type of risk you're taking on versus the amount of loans you're taking on. T2 schools at sticker are murder, but if you have a decent scholly they aren't a big problem at all. Also, I have no idea what connections you have or how strong they are. If they are as strong as you're making them out to be then you'll have a significant edge on anyone coming out of your class either way.

[masochist]

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless.

Um, just so you know, everybody thinks that he or she is an outlier. This is the basis of most of the terrible decisions people make. It is human nature to be irrationally optimistic. Maybe it is true in your case, maybe it isn't. Just know that most of the people who believe as you do are wrong.

[lolschool2011]

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless.

Um, just so you know, everybody thinks that he or she is an outlier. This is the basis of most of the terrible decisions people make. It is human nature to be irrationally optimistic. Maybe it is true in your case, maybe it isn't. Just know that most of the people who believe as you do are wrong.

Not true - I think there are people here smart enough to realize their experience/background is pretty common/conventional.

[mimi82]

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless.

Um, just so you know, everybody thinks that he or she is an outlier. This is the basis of most of the terrible decisions people make. It is human nature to be irrationally optimistic. Maybe it is true in your case, maybe it isn't. Just know that most of the people who believe as you do are wrong.

Not true - I think there are people here smart enough to realize their experience/background is pretty common/conventional.

Or you have ppl like me who don't think their WE is unique. I'm about 95% sure my WE certainly helped in getting me accepted at schools. My PS sounds resume because I was told by lawyers to add my WE in it. I didn't like it but I did it and it worked.

[Snape]

This is great...op asks for help and then gets mad at people for giving them real adivce...then OP accuses people of not knowing what they are talking about and having no expereince....I love it....good luck at a TTT school in Chicago and Im sure one of the more knowledgeable people on here giving you advise not to take out the loans at Loyola or whatever TTT Chicago school will happily help you fill out your loan forbearance and unemployment papers once you graduate...good luck!

[09042014]

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless.

Um, just so you know, everybody thinks that he or she is an outlier. This is the basis of most of the terrible decisions people make. It is human nature to be irrationally optimistic. Maybe it is true in your case, maybe it isn't. Just know that most of the people who believe as you do are wrong.

Not true - I think there are people here smart enough to realize their experience/background is pretty common/conventional.

You dumber than the conventional students because you are trying to give up a 100k+ job to go to a crappy law school. It's going to be a 150K mistake. But have fun.

[lolschool2011]

I completely understand your perpsective... and it is reasonable, to the extent you assume certain conditions. I'm such an outlier from the norm (and suspect there are many others ITT's) in terms of experience, established networks, etc, that most statistics are simply useless.

Um, just so you know, everybody thinks that he or she is an outlier. This is the basis of most of the terrible decisions people make. It is human nature to be irrationally optimistic. Maybe it is true in your case, maybe it isn't. Just know that most of the people who believe as you do are wrong.

Not true - I think there are people here smart enough to realize their experience/background is pretty common/conventional.

You dumber than the conventional students because you are trying to give up a 100k+ job to go to a crappy law school. It's going to be a 150K mistake. But have fun.

You're the dumbest. I said I'd keep my job (going PT) and will almost certainly be getting substantial scholarship.

[09042014]

You're the dumbest. I said I'd keep my job (going PT) and will almost certainly be getting substantial scholarship.

Lol, I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I.

Well if you are going on scholarship who cares. But Loyola is a TTT. I bet you end up working at your old job all said and done.

[lolschool2011]

You're the dumbest. I said I'd keep my job (going PT) and will almost certainly be getting substantial scholarship.

Lol, I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I.

Well if you are going on scholarship who cares. But Loyola is a TTT. I bet you end up working at your old job all said and done.

I'm T14 in TTT clothing.