Top Law Schools

I'm sure many others have dealt with this who have been out of college for some time and haven't gotten jobs in their major. Is there an elegant way to present this? Let me throw out my ideas and why this seems like a thorny subject.

1. I say that I just lost my passion. To adcomms this shows that I didn't know what I wanted and the same could happen with law.

2. I say that I realized the field just wasn't for me / my talents lie elsewhere. Here I appear incapable and that I couldn't properly estimate my abilities. Again, could happen with law.

3. I say that the job market is tough and couldn't find a job? Here I look like a failure.

4. I simply don't broach the subject. This may seem like a curious omission and adcomms may form their own reason (numbers 1, 2 and 3)


Is there any support for one or the other? Any options I haven't thought of?

*I also have a significant downward grade trend. In my mind this somewhat weakens option 4 and creates more need for 1 or 2 I think.
*making a poll for this was an afterthought. I'd love to hear reasons.

I don't understand. You really need to be more specific. What is your major? What is your job? I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where it would be reasonable to do anything other than 4.

Yah, lots of people don't work in the field they majored in after college, its NBD.

Veyron wrote:Yah, lots of people don't work in the field they majored in after college, its NBD.

this

Elston Gunn wrote:I don't understand. You really need to be more specific. What is your major? What is your job? I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where it would be reasonable to do anything other than 4.

For the sake of privacy I'd rather not give these specifics. Let's say, hypothetically, that I studied journalism but I've been waiting tables for last three years. Is this not a weakness and/or in need of explanation?

BigA wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:I don't understand. You really need to be more specific. What is your major? What is your job? I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where it would be reasonable to do anything other than 4.

For the sake of privacy I'd rather not give these specifics. Let's say, hypothetically, that I studied journalism but I've been waiting tables for last three years. Is this not a weakness and/or in need of explanation?

No explanation necessary.

BigA wrote:

Elston Gunn wrote:I don't understand. You really need to be more specific. What is your major? What is your job? I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where it would be reasonable to do anything other than 4.

For the sake of privacy I'd rather not give these specifics. Let's say, hypothetically, that I studied journalism but I've been waiting tables for last three years. Is this not a weakness and/or in need of explanation?

I know a girl who got a masters in psychology and she's still stripping.

Well, thanks for the feedback. So my rebuttal to number 4 is basically unfounded then? I'm surprised

BigA wrote:Well, thanks for the feedback. So my rebuttal to number 4 is basically unfounded then? I'm surprised

Why would you be surprised? Schools basically care only about LSDAS GPA and LSAT score unless you have some neat-o soft.

then I'm surprised by that too. I thought softs could hurt you more than they can help. Though I admit the soft in question isn't that bad

BigA wrote:then I'm surprised by that too. I thought softs could hurt you more than they can help. Though I admit the soft in question isn't that bad

How do you have 464 posts and not know the most basic TLS wisdom that is typically pounded into a user's brain after like 10 minutes on the site?

BigA wrote:then I'm surprised by that too. I thought softs could hurt you more than they can help. Though I admit the soft in question isn't that bad

Softs will never hurt you and rarely help you. I think you need to do some more research into this whole law school thing.

Veyron wrote:

BigA wrote:then I'm surprised by that too. I thought softs could hurt you more than they can help. Though I admit the soft in question isn't that bad

Softs will never hurt you and rarely help you.

they don't give a shit. Where you work can only help, not hurt.

Veyron wrote:

BigA wrote:then I'm surprised by that too. I thought softs could hurt you more than they can help. Though I admit the soft in question isn't that bad

Softs will never hurt you and rarely help you. I think you need to do some more research into this whole law school thing.

Who would like to spell out here what a "soft" factor is? I'm almost positive a "soft" is anything in your application other than your GPA and LSAT. A felony... that's a terrible soft. An LOR writer who's out to get you... deadly soft. An incredibly ill-conceived personal statement... perhaps fatal as well. I'm beginning to question some of the opinions here.

If I'm wrong about this, I'll stand corrected.

Yeah, those are examples of "softs" that will hurt you, but they are also easy enough to avoid or spot. Excluding such extremes though, it is almost entirely a numbers game, or a numbers plus AA game. The non-URM softs that will really help you are few and far between.

luthersloan wrote:Yeah, those are examples of "softs" that will hurt you, but they are also easy enough to avoid or spot. Excluding such extremes though, it is almost entirely a numbers game, or a numbers plus AA game. The non-URM softs that will really help you are few and far between.

This. These are really over-the-top examples that apply to almost no one. I also don't think that people consider criminal record to be a "soft" factor. Its more sui generis.