Page 1 of 3
Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:11 pm
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:45 pm
by Rigo
What are the total costs of attendance?
It's an uphill climb from all three schools but it's an especially steep one from Wake. NYC BigLaw just isn't realistically going to happen from Wake.
Biglaw is 12% from wake (and probably not NYC) with literally no federal clerkships.
GWU is 35%, but there is probably a caveat that that number is inflated by patent eligible IP grads who are more sought after by firms.
Fordham is at 35%.
I am not going to recommend any of these since the debt is a major concern and you are not likely to achieve your lofty goals (what is your plan B?).
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:50 pm
by Rigo
And when I say 35%, that's 9 months after graduation. A much smaller percentage probably got biglaw out of OCI and the remaining grads who eventually landed a job had to really hustle. So please don't view the 35% too optimistically just because you originally thought it was 20%. From speaking to friends, there is a huge amount of legwork involved to land a job if you strike out and it's insanely draining.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:03 pm
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:12 pm
by Rigo
johnnysacks wrote:Wake CoA - 66K
Fordham CoA - 83K
GW CoA - 85K
My thinking is I'm going to have to have top tier grades to get biglaw from any of these schools. If I get top tier grades at Wake can't I just transfer?
Okay I'm guessing you're not factoring in cost of living expenses and this is just for tuition.
When you say significantly less debt at Wake, I just don't see it. I guess the bulk is coming from cheap cost of living in NC compared to NYC, because a $17k difference isn't significant enough to cut your chance at your goal by two-thirds imo. I'm not saying Fordham is a great investment, but I'm just not really seeing how youre drawing this debt-risk tolerance line.
If you transfer (very unlikely and you shouldn't plan on it) you'll be paying two years of sticker price at your new school so that's not a good plan for someone debt phobic.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:30 pm
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:36 pm
by Rigo
johnnysacks wrote:It does includes living costs and such and not just tuition. I'd graduate with 90K or so in debt from Wake verses 180K from either of those schools. Seems like a huge difference to me.
Okay well you're not being clear at all in providing pertinent info since these numbers don't match what you gave me before with which I based my reply on.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:49 pm
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:02 am
by grades??
johnnysacks wrote:Wake CoA - 66K
Fordham CoA - 83K
GW CoA - 85K
My thinking is I'm going to have to have top tier grades to get biglaw from any of these schools. If I get top tier grades at Wake can't I just transfer?
Transfers generally don't do well at OCI. At my t13, the transfers who were all top 5-10% at their old schools really struggled with OCI and getting interviews. It is because you might be going through a t13 oci, but your grades and class rank are still from your old school. So don't think transferring from wake to say Duke is automatically going to get you an offer at oci, but generally it will not.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:05 am
by Rigo
johnnysacks wrote:Rigo wrote:johnnysacks wrote:It does includes living costs and such and not just tuition. I'd graduate with 90K or so in debt from Wake verses 180K from either of those schools. Seems like a huge difference to me.
Okay well you're not being clear at all in providing pertinent info since these numbers don't match what you gave me before with which I based my reply on.
What are you talking about? I gave the scholly money in my first post. You asked for the total cost of attendance. I gave them to you. Then you assumed that they didn't include cost of living and other necessities outside of tuition. What numbers did I give before that you based your reply on?
Okay let's break this down.
1) cost of attendance means your total debt. So (tuition minus scholarships) PLUS cost of living.
2) you provided figures that didn't make sense as cost of attendance figures so I assumed you didn't know what the term cost of attendance meant and were providing just the first part of the equation (tuition minus scholarships).
3) despite you not providing the cost of attendance, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you used a consistent method for all three schools in determining the figures you provided me. So I looked at the difference and realized that the difference between your cheapest option (Wake) and option most likely to help you achieve your goals (Fordham) was $17k.
4) I was confused because $17k isn't significant in the scheme of things.
5) you then told me the real difference is $90k.
6) now I'm confused how you got the numbers you originally gave me, but it seems everyone can just ignore that post now.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:06 am
by TakeItToTrial
johnnysacks wrote:Rigo wrote:johnnysacks wrote:It does includes living costs and such and not just tuition. I'd graduate with 90K or so in debt from Wake verses 180K from either of those schools. Seems like a huge difference to me.
Okay well you're not being clear at all in providing pertinent info since these numbers don't match what you gave me before with which I based my reply on.
What are you talking about? I gave the scholly money in my first post. You asked for the total cost of attendance. I gave them to you. Then you assumed that they didn't include cost of living and other necessities outside of tuition. What numbers did I give before that you based your reply on?
How could you have 180K debt from GW or Fordham when you calculated your COA for those schools at 85K and 83K, respectively?
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:41 am
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:43 am
by Npret
Just go to Wake and forego any NYC biglaw aspirations.
That's what I would do.
Transferring in law is not close to the same as undergrad. It's difficult and may not help you get a job. Employers will look at you as if you are still from Wake.
I know most of the 0Ls here don't accept that they won't be the top of their class, shrug off expecting median and maybe think all they need to do is work hard. But that's not the case.
If you want a more realistic shot at your stated goals you need different schools but you won't retake. So given what you have I would change my job expectations, stay in North Carolina and try to build a career.
I realize you are unlikely to take this advice ( maybe 15% chance) and will end up $180,000 in debt at Fordham on the chance you will get biglaw. Still wanted to give you my best advice.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:06 am
by cavalier1138
So you want people to validate your bad choices?
Not gonna happen. Retake/reapply or don't go to law school. You can't count on being at the top of your class at any of these schools, and you won't have a realistic shot at your goals from any of them.
Either change your goals or change your LSAT. But stop asking people to pat you on the head and tell you what a great decision you're making.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:54 am
by OneHandedEconomist
cavalier1138 wrote:So you want people to validate your bad choices?
Not gonna happen. Retake/reapply or don't go to law school. You can't count on being at the top of your class at any of these schools, and you won't have a realistic shot at your goals from any of them.
Either change your goals or change your LSAT. But stop asking people to pat you on the head and tell you what a great decision you're making.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:15 am
by guynourmin
johnnysacks wrote:Oh dear, let me start over. So what I did was subtract the money I got from scholarships from the CoA that I posted then multiplied by 3 since law school is 3 years. So for example, Forham Law is 83K per year TOTAL (tuition plus cost of living). I will now subtract the grant money they have me (20k) from the CoA. That leaves 63K to be financed via loans. 63K every year for 3 years is 180K. Hence why I said I'd be in debt 180K. Whereas with Wake I'd be in debt only around 90K. Does that make more sense? Sorry if the way I did my calculations was out of the norm.
All Rigo was asking for was 1 number per school: your total debt at graduation, inc interest, origination fees, etc. Georgetown has a good calculator you can use (Google Georgetown law debt calc or something like that). The simple way you're doing it here is probably off by over $10,000
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:18 am
by guynourmin
Also, retake
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:24 am
by zot1
Gotta agree that your options won't get you to where you are.
A few things:
1. If you're debt adverse, this is WAY too much debt to take on for very small chances at getting the jobs you want. Your debt will be compounding every day after you get those loans and compounding interest is deathly.
2. Best shot at your goals would likely be Fordham. But your odds are so bad that calling it "best shot" is misleading. Perhaps I should say the best way to make a bad decision is to pick Fordham.
4. Given your school choices and scholarship money, you most likely have a low gpa, a low lsat, or both. This is already problematic for you because it makes it more likely that you won't place high enough on your class to either make biglaw or to transfer.
5. All of the above changes if you had less lofty goals and would be okay making little money while you see that money go away every month when you make your student loan payments.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:05 am
by existentialcrisis
zot1 wrote:Gotta agree that your options won't get you to where you are.
2. Best shot at your goals would likely be Fordham. But your odds are so bad that calling it "best shot" is misleading. Perhaps I should say the best way to make a bad decision is to pick Fordham.
This. Do not go to any of these schools with these goals. But I don't get the Wake thing at all. First, setting aside the top 10% grades you'd need to transfer, if you're so debt adverse, then why would you want to pay sticker for 2 years somewhere else? Second, I think you are wildly underestimating the grades you'd need for North Carolina "midlaw," which you'd likely also need to be at the top of the WFU class to land.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:35 am
by BasilHallward
Where are you from OP? To echo this entire thread, (1) you need to accurately calculate your expected debt commitment; (2) you need to realize how insular and small the NC midlaw market. It's not a fallback, but aspirational for many at Wake.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:40 am
by johnnysacks
delete
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:56 am
by Npret
johnnysacks wrote:I really do appreciate all the advice everyone is giving. The candor and honesty is exactly what I expected and I thank you for all that. Not to derail the discussion but I am legitimately curious about something. People universally say that you cannot expect to place within top 10% at law school (which makes sense) is it really just random? How DOES one get top 10%. Do you just lucky? Is it the lottery? Is there nothing I can do to increase my chances? When I go to law school should I not even bother to try? I hear people say things like "You've never taken a law school exam, its different you don't get the hang of it until 2L" or "The curve is arbitrary" or "Expect median". But WHAT exactly makes law school exams so difficult and alien that you cannot hard work your way into the top 10%? Just to be clear I'm not snowflaking or hamstering my way into saying I'm gonna be at the top of my class at law school, I just want to hear SPECIFIC warrants as to why it is difficult and something that is chalked up to luck as opposed to hard work.
And as I side note, Do people who are at median at the places I listed just....not get jobs? What would you say is the average salary for a median Fordham/GW Law student.
You take one exam for a grade. The grade is a mandatory curve so the number of As is set before class even starts. Everyone could write a fantastic exam but the professor can only give the set numbers of As. The professor grades with certain things in mind.
Everyone works hard. Some people are savants at law exams some people never get them.
You were asking about biglaw and clerkships. If you will take any job go to Wake. I have no idea where the median people go. Maybe ask the school.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 11:59 am
by cavalier1138
Most likely salary for graduates from these schools is probably around $45-60k starting out. Fordham might have a slightly higher number because NYC government jobs pay a higher rate due to the high COL in the area. But that's the general salary distribution for non-biglaw jobs.
As for exams, it's not that you shouldn't try. And it also isn't that there's no way to prepare for exams. The issue is that you're going to be graded on a forced curve against a bunch of students who are all basically in the same bracket for competence. So if only 5 students per class can get an A on a particular exam, then your objective performance level is meaningless. If 5 students perform better than you, you won't get an A. And every student in your class will be working hard to keep their grades up.
It's not entirely random, but there is a definite level of arbitrariness, especially when the exam is on a tight curve. The difference between an A and B+ could literally be one missed issue or a handful of points lost by not picking the wrong argument to discuss (at least the wrong argument for that professor). But the main thing to remember is that you're being ranked next to your classmates. 100% of your class is not expecting to be in the bottom half, but 50% of them are going to be very upset once grades are given out. That's just how the numbers work.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:01 pm
by existentialcrisis
Npret wrote:johnnysacks wrote:I really do appreciate all the advice everyone is giving. The candor and honesty is exactly what I expected and I thank you for all that. Not to derail the discussion but I am legitimately curious about something. People universally say that you cannot expect to place within top 10% at law school (which makes sense) is it really just random? How DOES one get top 10%. Do you just lucky? Is it the lottery? Is there nothing I can do to increase my chances? When I go to law school should I not even bother to try? I hear people say things like "You've never taken a law school exam, its different you don't get the hang of it until 2L" or "The curve is arbitrary" or "Expect median". But WHAT exactly makes law school exams so difficult and alien that you cannot hard work your way into the top 10%? Just to be clear I'm not snowflaking or hamstering my way into saying I'm gonna be at the top of my class at law school, I just want to hear SPECIFIC warrants as to why it is difficult and something that is chalked up to luck as opposed to hard work.
And as I side note, Do people who are at median at the places I listed just....not get jobs? What would you say is the average salary for a median Fordham/GW Law student.
You take one exam for a grade. The grade is a mandatory curve so the number of As is set before class even starts. Everyone could write a fantastic exam but the professor can only give the set numbers of As. The professor grades with certain things in mind.
Everyone works hard. Some people are savants at law exams some people never get them.
Some people just have a talent for taking issue spotter law school exams. This talent does not seem to correlate all that strongly with intelligence or hard work.
People improve can improve on their exam taking skills, but everyone who isn't at the top of the class after first semester will also probably be trying to do the same thing.
Re: Fordham v GW ($) vs Wake ($) [No Retake Advice]
Posted: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:02 pm
by mjb447
Npret wrote:johnnysacks wrote:I really do appreciate all the advice everyone is giving. The candor and honesty is exactly what I expected and I thank you for all that. Not to derail the discussion but I am legitimately curious about something. People universally say that you cannot expect to place within top 10% at law school (which makes sense) is it really just random? How DOES one get top 10%. Do you just lucky? Is it the lottery? Is there nothing I can do to increase my chances? When I go to law school should I not even bother to try? I hear people say things like "You've never taken a law school exam, its different you don't get the hang of it until 2L" or "The curve is arbitrary" or "Expect median". But WHAT exactly makes law school exams so difficult and alien that you cannot hard work your way into the top 10%? Just to be clear I'm not snowflaking or hamstering my way into saying I'm gonna be at the top of my class at law school, I just want to hear SPECIFIC warrants as to why it is difficult and something that is chalked up to luck as opposed to hard work.
And as I side note, Do people who are at median at the places I listed just....not get jobs? What would you say is the average salary for a median Fordham/GW Law student.
You take one exam for a grade. The grade is a mandatory curve so the number of As is set before class even starts. The professor grades with certain things in mind.
Everyone works hard. Some people are savants at law exams some people never get them.
Law students are also much more self-selected than UG students, i.e. far more of them (at least at schools that are at all selective) tend to be the type of people who liked school and did well enough to chance three more years there for a big opportunity cost and often large additional debt. That can ratchet up the baseline level of student competence and grit, which combines with the forced curve to median pwn a slew of people who might have been above average during UG.