Chances for Stetson/FIU Forum

[leroyjenkins6969]

"Utility optimization?" Grow up kid. Here's a phrase for you: debt pwned with no job. That's what happens to far too many kids who attend these schools. Just because some people have good outcomes doesn't mean it's a good bet. It's totally fine to dismiss a school as an option when the average outcome is so crappy.

Not when the alternatives are even crappier.

What's crappier than being 100K+ in debt and having worse job prospects than you started out with because people are afraid to hire JDs for non-lawyer jobs?

I'm just not sure where you get this from. How can you say JDs have worse job prospects than when you started...and why would you limit the option set to non-lawyer jobs?

Listen- I would never go to one of those law schools. For me, it would be an absolutely terrible decision, considering my alternatives. Perhaps many, if not most people on these forums, are in the same boat. That said, for some people, settling for a school like Stetson may be their best alternative.

[leroyjenkins6969]

There are a lot more unsuccessful people who go to a school like Stetson.
There are some successful people who drop out of grade school, does not mean it is a good idea.

True, though your claim that there are more unsuccessful people than successful people at Stetson is unsupported, and without a working definition of successful, comes off as a non sequitur.

I would say that people who have a paycheck to debt ration that crushes their soul is unsuccessful. By looking at LST we can see this is the most likely outcome for a graduate of a school like Stetson.

Well at least you've offered a definition for being unsuccessful.

[NYstate]

$200K in debt for a minimal boost to job prospects? Unless the alternative is prison-time, I don't think you could do much worse.

You can do a lot worse than a $60,000 job working as an attorney is a small firm. My guess is, you are doing worse right now.

Shut up and stop giving terrible, uninformed advice.

If this is shitting on someone's dream, too bad. They probably have that dream because they are uninformed about law and employment. We are trying to help them not make a terrible mistake.

0 Ls still have a lot of bad information presented to them from schools, parents, pre-law advisors. We are trying to help them see reality.

Maybe we sound harsh - but maybe that helps get someone's attention.

OP can do much better than those schools. And we should tell him/ her what reality is. OP needs to aim higher. He can do better.

[leroyjenkins6969]

What exactly do you think a 56.5% employment score means? Don't make up numbers and throw them around as if they mean something. According to Law School Transparency, we know very little about the salary data for FIU and Stetson grads. One thing we do know is that for the Stetson class of 2010 (over three years ago), at least 10.8% made $60,000 or more.

0Ls, please do your research with resources like LST and seek advice from people who have actually experienced the terrible legal hiring market; don't listen to morons who make up numbers, toss out unverified generalities, and spout phrases like "utility optimization."

I think my initial point was, don't listen to anyone on the TLS forums. Especially those that spout phrases. So I actually agree with the philosoraptor.

If the counterargument is just that it's bad to shit on people's dreams, you're resorting to ad hominem. It's against our cultural norms to give people unsolicited advice in real life, or to tell them not to pursue a dream they have. Unless the dreamer has been exposed to this before, it's natural for them to react with aggression to what they perceive to either be a threat or sign of disrespect. If anything that makes what people say on the forums more truthful. There's no fear of real life conflict to amend the responses. Like when you ask a child if you look fat, you get honest albeit discomforting advice.

I don't think you are wrong. I just feel like TLSers can have some more compassion for those people who don't have the numbers for T14 schools.

[BigZuck]

"Utility optimization?" Grow up kid. Here's a phrase for you: debt pwned with no job. That's what happens to far too many kids who attend these schools. Just because some people have good outcomes doesn't mean it's a good bet. It's totally fine to dismiss a school as an option when the average outcome is so crappy.

Not when the alternatives are even crappier.

What's crappier than being 100K+ in debt and having worse job prospects than you started out with because people are afraid to hire JDs for non-lawyer jobs?

I'm just not sure where you get this from. How can you say JDs have worse job prospects than when you started...and why would you limit the option set to non-lawyer jobs?

Listen- I would never go to one of those law schools. For me, it would be an absolutely terrible decision, considering my alternatives. Perhaps many, if not most people on these forums, are in the same boat. That said, for some people, settling for a school like Stetson may be their best alternative.

About half the people who go to a school like Stetson will not become lawyers, period (and I bet a decent slice of those who do find long term, full time legal employment are as solo practitioners or grads banding together to try and make a firm that will ultimately fail). But if you want to, lets just stick to 50% won't become lawyers.

Now, they try to apply for other jobs. Those will be the same jobs that they could have got without the JD. Not only that, but some employers might see that they have a JD and refuse to hire them because they (wrongly) assume that that person wants too high of a salary or will bolt for some sweet lawyer job in a month or two.

Getting a JD isn't automatically a net positive. And even if you do snag a 50K lawyer job and you're 150K in debt, that's not necessarily better than getting a lower paying, non-lawyer job with no debt.

[Nucky]

FIU and Stetson are not the greatest law schools, and going into debt to attend either is more than likely a bad decision. Since you have not taken the LSAT yet, you should study and shoot for a score that will get you into UF/FSU, at least. However, if you can attend FIU or Stetson for free, which I imagine you could probably do with a 160, and are geographically limited for whatever reason, and UM is out of the picture, attending one or the other for free would not be the worst thing in the world as long as you are realistic about your career prospects, or lack of upon graduation. But if you are not limited to these schools and you're just being a slacker, then you deserve what you get.

Your life, your call.

Can we all agree on this and end this ridiculous debate?

Edit: Sorry for typos. Typing from phone.

[leroyjenkins6969]

$200K in debt for a minimal boost to job prospects? Unless the alternative is prison-time, I don't think you could do much worse.

You can do a lot worse than a $60,000 job working as an attorney is a small firm. My guess is, you are doing worse right now.

Shut up and stop giving terrible, uninformed advice.

If this is shitting on someone's dream, too bad. They probably have that dream because they are uninformed about law and employment. We are trying to help them not make a terrible mistake.

0 Ls still have a lot of bad information presented to them from schools, parents, pre-law advisors. We are trying to help them see reality.

Maybe we sound harsh - but maybe that helps get someone's attention.

OP can do much better than those schools. And we should tell him/ her what reality is. OP needs to aim higher. He can do better.

If OP can do better, then I agree- he should certainly aim higher. Also, I appreciate the perspective you offer in this post.

[leroyjenkins6969]

About half the people who go to a school like Stetson will not become lawyers, period (and I bet a decent slice of those who do find long term, full time legal employment are as solo practitioners or grads banding together to try and make a firm that will ultimately fail). But if you want to, lets just stick to 50% won't become lawyers.

Now, they try to apply for other jobs. Those will be the same jobs that they could have got without the JD. Not only that, but some employers might see that they have a JD and refuse to hire them because they (wrongly) assume that that person wants too high of a salary or will bolt for some sweet lawyer job in a month or two.

Getting a JD isn't automatically a net positive. And even if you do snag a 50K lawyer job and you're 150K in debt, that's not necessarily better than getting a lower paying, non-lawyer job with no debt.

It is not an automatic net positive, I agree. Stetson is not Cooley, though. And 50% of Stetson grads don't become lawyers? That seems high to me, but I honestly don't have any data to back this up.

Through the course of this short-lived debate, I've gained a new perspective on why some TLSers give the advice they give, and give it the way they do- and I appreciate this perspective. I just think that some TLSers could benefit from seeing a different perspective on the topics discussed on these forums.

[Nucky]

About half the people who go to a school like Stetson will not become lawyers, period (and I bet a decent slice of those who do find long term, full time legal employment are as solo practitioners or grads banding together to try and make a firm that will ultimately fail). But if you want to, lets just stick to 50% won't become lawyers.

Now, they try to apply for other jobs. Those will be the same jobs that they could have got without the JD. Not only that, but some employers might see that they have a JD and refuse to hire them because they (wrongly) assume that that person wants too high of a salary or will bolt for some sweet lawyer job in a month or two.

Getting a JD isn't automatically a net positive. And even if you do snag a 50K lawyer job and you're 150K in debt, that's not necessarily better than getting a lower paying, non-lawyer job with no debt.

It is not an automatic net positive, I agree. Stetson is not Cooley, though. And 50% of Stetson grads don't become lawyers? That seems high to me, but I honestly don't have any data to back this up.

Through the course of this short-lived debate, I've gained a new perspective on why some TLSers give the advice they give, and give it the way they do- and I appreciate this perspective. I just think that some TLSers could benefit from seeing a different perspective on the topics discussed on these forums.

The ABA Employment Stats disagree with you, but I suppose they could be misreporting.

[BigZuck]

About half the people who go to a school like Stetson will not become lawyers, period (and I bet a decent slice of those who do find long term, full time legal employment are as solo practitioners or grads banding together to try and make a firm that will ultimately fail). But if you want to, lets just stick to 50% won't become lawyers.

Now, they try to apply for other jobs. Those will be the same jobs that they could have got without the JD. Not only that, but some employers might see that they have a JD and refuse to hire them because they (wrongly) assume that that person wants too high of a salary or will bolt for some sweet lawyer job in a month or two.

Getting a JD isn't automatically a net positive. And even if you do snag a 50K lawyer job and you're 150K in debt, that's not necessarily better than getting a lower paying, non-lawyer job with no debt.

It is not an automatic net positive, I agree. Stetson is not Cooley, though. And 50% of Stetson grads don't become lawyers? That seems high to me, but I honestly don't have any data to back this up.

Through the course of this short-lived debate, I've gained a new perspective on why some TLSers give the advice they give, and give it the way they do- and I appreciate this perspective. I just think that some TLSers could benefit from seeing a different perspective on the topics discussed on these forums.

The data was already linked in this thread http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=stetson

Looks like Stetson has about 40% not becoming lawyers. I doubt it's all sunshine and rainbows for the other 60% though.

I am curious since you brought it up. What is the different perspective that I and other TLSers are missing?

[leroyjenkins6969]

The data was already linked in this thread http://www.lstscorereports.com/?school=stetson

Looks like Stetson has about 40% not becoming lawyers. I doubt it's all sunshine and rainbows for the other 60% though.

I am curious since you brought it up. What is the different perspective that I and other TLSers are missing?

Interesting. This is just for a recent class of grads...I wonder how many Stetson grads end up becoming attorneys a few years down the line. Either way, not looking all that great.

The perspective I am thinking of is the person whose alternatives are literally shittier than going to a tier-3 school and incurring massive debt. It is the perspective of someone who is being paid $25,000/year with a soft degree from a mediocre undergrad school, with the mid-career earning potential of $60,000 or so. These number simply serve as an example, but some of my friends from home are in this boat. For them, going to a tier-3 may be a better choice than settling for the career that's currently in front of them.

[heythatslife]

About half the people who go to a school like Stetson will not become lawyers, period (and I bet a decent slice of those who do find long term, full time legal employment are as solo practitioners or grads banding together to try and make a firm that will ultimately fail). But if you want to, lets just stick to 50% won't become lawyers.

Now, they try to apply for other jobs. Those will be the same jobs that they could have got without the JD. Not only that, but some employers might see that they have a JD and refuse to hire them because they (wrongly) assume that that person wants too high of a salary or will bolt for some sweet lawyer job in a month or two.

Getting a JD isn't automatically a net positive. And even if you do snag a 50K lawyer job and you're 150K in debt, that's not necessarily better than getting a lower paying, non-lawyer job with no debt.

It is not an automatic net positive, I agree. Stetson is not Cooley, though. And 50% of Stetson grads don't become lawyers? That seems high to me, but I honestly don't have any data to back this up.

Through the course of this short-lived debate, I've gained a new perspective on why some TLSers give the advice they give, and give it the way they do- and I appreciate this perspective. I just think that some TLSers could benefit from seeing a different perspective on the topics discussed on these forums.

Bar passage rate for Stetson appears to hover around 80%. But then, only half of the grads can find LT/FT legal jobs, which IMO is the more important statistic to look at, since being unemployed defeats the purpose of having passed the bar anyway. So the correct worded statement should "Half of Stetson grads do not end up working as lawyers." Of course, this indicates nothing about the quality of jobs for those who did find them BUT large firm score is 4.7% sooooooo.....

[PepperJack]

What exactly do you think a 56.5% employment score means? Don't make up numbers and throw them around as if they mean something. According to Law School Transparency, we know very little about the salary data for FIU and Stetson grads. One thing we do know is that for the Stetson class of 2010 (over three years ago), at least 10.8% made $60,000 or more.

0Ls, please do your research with resources like LST and seek advice from people who have actually experienced the terrible legal hiring market; don't listen to morons who make up numbers, toss out unverified generalities, and spout phrases like "utility optimization."

I think my initial point was, don't listen to anyone on the TLS forums. Especially those that spout phrases. So I actually agree with the philosoraptor.

If the counterargument is just that it's bad to shit on people's dreams, you're resorting to ad hominem. It's against our cultural norms to give people unsolicited advice in real life, or to tell them not to pursue a dream they have. Unless the dreamer has been exposed to this before, it's natural for them to react with aggression to what they perceive to either be a threat or sign of disrespect. If anything that makes what people say on the forums more truthful. There's no fear of real life conflict to amend the responses. Like when you ask a child if you look fat, you get honest albeit discomforting advice.

I don't think you are wrong. I just feel like TLSers can have some more compassion for those people who don't have the numbers for T14 schools.

If compassion means encouraging one to attend a TTT then I would agree with encouraging them... so long as law firms also show compassion, and hire significant numbers from TTT's. However, they don't do so so why lie about it? This isn't second grade. You don't give poor advice just because you don't want to hurt a client's feelings. In fact, a lawyer's responsibility is to do the opposite. There is nothing in the model rules of professional conduct about being a nice guy, but there are commands to provide forthcoming and candid advice.

[Lwoods1020]

Both are terrible schools. Don't go to either.

It's not that this is bad advice, but you may literally be shitting on this person's dreams. Ok...figuratively shitting on their dreams. I don't understand why so many people on TLS have this attitude.

Sure, the job prospects coming out of those schools aren't great. But prospects must be evaluated against realistic alternatives, not unachievable ideals. Going to a law school like Stetson can actually be the prospect with the highest expected utility for some folks. I am disheartened that many TLSers can be so obtuse, and worse yet, offer advice that isn't applicable to everyone. Not all law students want "Big Law."

this.

EDIT: I started this thread at the beginning and stopped at this, I didn't realize it was discussed further.

[BigZuck]

Both are terrible schools. Don't go to either.

It's not that this is bad advice, but you may literally be shitting on this person's dreams. Ok...figuratively shitting on their dreams. I don't understand why so many people on TLS have this attitude.

Sure, the job prospects coming out of those schools aren't great. But prospects must be evaluated against realistic alternatives, not unachievable ideals. Going to a law school like Stetson can actually be the prospect with the highest expected utility for some folks. I am disheartened that many TLSers can be so obtuse, and worse yet, offer advice that isn't applicable to everyone. Not all law students want "Big Law."

this.

EDIT: I started this thread at the beginning and stopped at this, I didn't realize it was discussed further.

This is a truly awful way to look at things. We shouldn't be encouraging people to ruin their lives. If a guy said "Dude, I'm gonna jump!" I would try to talk him down. If someone said "Should I cut off my right hand or my left hand? It's gotta be one or the other!" I would say neither.

If someone comes here with a question, they deserve the best, most candid advice possible

[PepperJack]

Both are terrible schools. Don't go to either.

It's not that this is bad advice, but you may literally be shitting on this person's dreams. Ok...figuratively shitting on their dreams. I don't understand why so many people on TLS have this attitude.

Sure, the job prospects coming out of those schools aren't great. But prospects must be evaluated against realistic alternatives, not unachievable ideals. Going to a law school like Stetson can actually be the prospect with the highest expected utility for some folks. I am disheartened that many TLSers can be so obtuse, and worse yet, offer advice that isn't applicable to everyone. Not all law students want "Big Law."

this.

EDIT: I started this thread at the beginning and stopped at this, I didn't realize it was discussed further.

The issue isn't getting big law. It is that if one took out 200k in loans, and wound up with a 40k a year salary in a branch of law that doesn't have much growth potential then there is a good argument that working retail with the high likelihood of getting promoted to manager at between 15-20/hour is a better outcome. If OP could hypothetically get big law if he was top 25% at a t-14 then he can very likely get a retail job now, and do well at it. Simply having a good grasp of the English language, not being deformed and smiling would make OP very attractive to many high end clothing stores.

So basically if OP wins as much as is reasonably possible at Stetson or FIU, law school was a mistake. The overwhelming majority of people coming from these schools will never touch a six-figure salary. A significant number would kill for a 40k/yr job. It is hard to believe that Stetson would really be the best case scenario for anyone, because assuming OP doesn't want to ruin his credit or default on his loans, he's essentially going to law school to have a low quality of life.

These 40 hour a week legal jobs paying 80k to first year lawyers don't really exist. Data also shows that these types of jobs are actually more preferred by first year lawyers than are big law jobs where there is less work-life balance yet how many law students from even the t-14 actually get these jobs? 2-3%? It isn't like it's big law or 80k and a middle class life. It's big law/clerkship, public interest (which is similarly comparative and even more unpredictable in terms of hiring) and being fucked. These are the 3 most common outcomes for all law students regardless of school, and the Florida law schools (except for maybe UF/FSU) have a greater likelihood of being fucked than not being fucked (I consider a 40k salary with no LRAP on a 200k loan to be fucked).

There is no evidence that this is OP's dream, that he dreams of waking up each day in a roach infested studio apartment on an impoverished street, putting on a K-Mart signature suit and ride the overcrowded city bus to help the little guy get justice. It appears that OP just wants a job that will enable him to earn a living wage, and be able to start a family like most law students do (and is probably the most practical way to approach the entire thing).

The issue is not only that Stetson or FIU are unlikely to provide that to OP, but also that as a consequence of the debt OP may be forever precluded from options that will earn him a living wage. When one has 200k in debt, they need a high paying job. We're looking at a situation that has a strong possibility of paying a McDonalds type weekly take home income, but if McDonalds Academy charged future cashiers 200k to work for minimum wage. Even with no debt, it is difficult to live off of a McDonalds salary. The only reason why there isn't a similar public uproar about places like Stetson and FIU are the beliefs that (1) lawyers are all rich, (2) one can do anything with their law degree and (3) fuck lawyers - they take our money.

[BankruptMe]

I am relatively new here, but if the Full Time employment rate is less than 50%, it is a crap shoot.

I would not go to a school ranked under 100 (unless Howard). And even then, I hope that I will not have to worry about a school under USNWR 50.

If you have a 3.2, why not apply for UM or FSU? I have a 3.2 and I am applying for UM, hell I even got a free application just by asking them. You could probably get free ones for FSU, UM and UFL if you ask.

[PepperJack]

I am relatively new here, but if the Full Time employment rate is less than 50%, it is a crap shoot.

I would not go to a school ranked under 100 (unless Howard). And even then, I hope that I will not have to worry about a school under USNWR 50.

If you have a 3.2, why not apply for UM or FSU? I have a 3.2 and I am applying for UM, hell I even got a free application just by asking them. You could probably get free ones for FSU, UM and UFL if you ask.

The issue isn't really so much the 50% job placement as much as it's where those 50% wind up. Look, TLS group think is that it's impossible the predict how you'll fare in law school. The reality is that in the TTT/TTTT world there are a lot of idiots who struggle to read the English language and people who generally lack the work ethic of t-14 students. If OP studied hard it's very likely he'd be above median. The issue is he'll have to be #1 or #2 in his whole class to have made it a good bet, and there is just so much variance at play there because too many things have to break right. Even the shittiest law school in the world has 1-2 outliers who would likely compete at HYS, were misinformed, legitimately wrongfully measured on the LSAT and true worker bees. It's a situation where OP needs to not only be that 1-2%, but also a situation where everything has to break right (OP never gets the flu, is an exceptional interviewer, never misreads a question stem). You're talking odds much worse than any casino game, and more similar to scratch off lotto tickets.

I don't understand why it's "mean" or "wrong" to tell someone the truth about the prospects coming from shit law schools. We have an ethical obligation, as lawyers, to provide candid and truthful advice to our clients. We can be disbarred and liable for money damages for providing advice we know is not accurate even if we are doing so just to be nice.

Sugarcoating it would be like a stockbroker telling a client who dreams of getting rich to invest all his savings in some shitty ass stock likely to go under. The stockbroker who says, "The market sucks now - hold onto your money or only invest in safe stocks" shouldn't be deemed an asshole. S/he should be deemed the example.

Feeling optimistic and good about one's future does not put bread on the table. Buying bread puts bread on the table. If providing realistic feedback makes someone cry then this person likely isn't cut out for the profession even if they had a 4.0/180.

[AntipodeanPhil]

Leroyjenkins needs to grow a conscience and stop trying to ruin people's lives. There are people who take these threads seriously, and are actually influenced by them in making important life decisions.

As others have already pointed out, success from a school like Stetson involves desperately struggling to get any JD-required job that pays a salary.

It's also worth pointing out that failure from a school like this can be much worse that people here have been suggesting. A close friend of mine went to a lower tier 1 school and ended up in the bottom 50%. Through law school, she applied for hundreds of JD-required jobs, and was rejected by all of them. After law school she passed the bar, kept applying, and kept getting consistently rejected. Very occasionally, she got interviews before being rejected. Once, she got a part-time JD-required position, but they weren't hiring for anything longer-term.

Currently, she is working in retail - and has been for a couple of years now. This girl had a decent, professional job before starting law school. She worked in an office and earned $30,000+. Unfortunately, her old employer won't take her back. This isn't an unusual outcome - apparently almost all of her friends are in similar positions, working non-legal jobs of one kind or another.

But the outcome itself isn't all that's bad about this. Getting rejected hundreds of time - constantly getting rejection letters and emails - is very difficult emotionally. What's more, her family and her non-law-school friends don't understand. While they generally don't say it, it's clear that most of them think that she's failed at life. She went to law school (a school they thought was prestigious) and ended up in retail, enormously in debt - she must have done something wrong. Hence, she feels like a loser, and has since she started getting rejections (over 5 years ago now). Before law school, she was a confident, sunny, happy person, with a positive view of the world. Now she is depressed, her confidence is completely shot, and she has no real hope that her life will get any better.

Of course, this is an anecdote, but the general point is that talking only about objective outcomes from these schools (which are awful) ignores the emotional aspect of the very high chance of failure. It's hard to appreciate it until you live through it, but the emotional aspect alone can ruin years of your life and completely change who you are as a person.

[PepperJack]

Leroyjenkins needs to grow a conscience and stop trying to ruin people's lives. There are people who take these threads seriously, and are actually influenced by them in making important life decisions.

As others have already pointed out, success from a school like Stetson involves desperately struggling to get any JD-required job that pays a salary.

It's also worth pointing out that failure from a school like this can be much worse that people here have been suggesting. A close friend of mine went to a lower tier 1 school and ended up in the bottom 50%. Through law school, she applied for hundreds of JD-required jobs, and was rejected by all of them. After law school she passed the bar, kept applying, and kept getting consistently rejected. Very occasionally, she got interviews before being rejected. Once, she got a part-time JD-required position, but they weren't hiring for anything longer-term.

Currently, she is working in retail - and has been for a couple of years now. This girl had a decent, professional job before starting law school. She worked in an office and earned $30,000+. Unfortunately, her old employer won't take her back. This isn't an unusual outcome - apparently almost all of her friends are in similar positions, working non-legal jobs of one kind or another.

But the outcome itself isn't all that's bad about this. Getting rejected hundreds of time - constantly getting rejection letters and emails - is very difficult emotionally. What's more, her family and her non-law-school friends don't understand. While they generally don't say it, it's clear that most of them think that she's failed at life. She went to law school (a school they thought was prestigious) and ended up in retail, enormously in debt - she must have done something wrong. Hence, she feels like a loser, and has since she started getting rejections (over 5 years ago now). Before law school, she was a confident, sunny, happy person, with a positive view of the world. Now she is depressed, her confidence is completely shot, and she has no real hope that her life will get any better.

Of course, this is an anecdote, but the general point is that talking only about objective outcomes from these schools (which are awful) ignores the emotional aspect of the very high chance of failure. It's hard to appreciate it until you live through it, but the emotional aspect alone can ruin years of your life and completely change who you are as a person.

I don't necessarily see why constant rejection would diminish her self-esteem in this situation. Statistically, this was the likely outcome. It's not like they were rejecting her for some immutable trait or her personality. I think the general feeling of waking up each day, and going to work knowing that after a hard worked day you'll likely still be in a bottom of a pit you can't climb out of makes life very difficult. I'd also imagine that acquiring so much education through hard work, and then kind of being delegated to a job that utilizes very little of your mind can break someone. It's a very bad situation, but she did have many opportunities to cut bait. If she was below median, she could have cut her losses much earlier.

[leroyjenkins6969]

Leroyjenkins needs to grow a conscience and stop trying to ruin people's lives. There are people who take these threads seriously, and are actually influenced by them in making important life decisions.

As others have already pointed out, success from a school like Stetson involves desperately struggling to get any JD-required job that pays a salary.

It's also worth pointing out that failure from a school like this can be much worse that people here have been suggesting. A close friend of mine went to a lower tier 1 school and ended up in the bottom 50%. Through law school, she applied for hundreds of JD-required jobs, and was rejected by all of them. After law school she passed the bar, kept applying, and kept getting consistently rejected. Very occasionally, she got interviews before being rejected. Once, she got a part-time JD-required position, but they weren't hiring for anything longer-term.

Currently, she is working in retail - and has been for a couple of years now. This girl had a decent, professional job before starting law school. She worked in an office and earned $30,000+. Unfortunately, her old employer won't take her back. This isn't an unusual outcome - apparently almost all of her friends are in similar positions, working non-legal jobs of one kind or another.

But the outcome itself isn't all that's bad about this. Getting rejected hundreds of time - constantly getting rejection letters and emails - is very difficult emotionally. What's more, her family and her non-law-school friends don't understand. While they generally don't say it, it's clear that most of them think that she's failed at life. She went to law school (a school they thought was prestigious) and ended up in retail, enormously in debt - she must have done something wrong. Hence, she feels like a loser, and has since she started getting rejections (over 5 years ago now). Before law school, she was a confident, sunny, happy person, with a positive view of the world. Now she is depressed, her confidence is completely shot, and she has no real hope that her life will get any better.

Of course, this is an anecdote, but the general point is that talking only about objective outcomes from these schools (which are awful) ignores the emotional aspect of the very high chance of failure. It's hard to appreciate it until you live through it, but the emotional aspect alone can ruin years of your life and completely change who you are as a person.

If you read my initial post in this thread, you will see that it's not the advice itself I was criticizing. It's the way it was given. In fact, if you look at the very first sentence, I say: "It's not that this is bad advice...."

People are more receptive to balanced advice that doesn't arouse emotions like anger or regret. Go ahead and research it (or don't, and I'm sure this is something that many will find debatable). I would strongly suggest that applicants aim higher than Stetson (I hope this is apparent by now...if not, I haven't communicated this well enough). And you are correct: some people do take these threads very seriously. So why not have more compassion for those people, and guide them in a way that doesn't come off as condescending.

[edwardt1988]

.

[leroyjenkins6969]

There are a lot more unsuccessful people who go to a school like Stetson.
There are some successful people who drop out of grade school, does not mean it is a good idea.

True, though your claim that there are more unsuccessful people than successful people at Stetson is unsupported, and without a working definition of successful, comes off as a non sequitur.

What are you talking about. Stop using fancy terms that don't apply and that you don't seem to have a good grasp of. Utility optimization is best calculated as regarded to the expected value of the investment. For most people attending those schools, the expected value is negative. Dreams, desires, etc. should be excluded from the calculation since they're impossible to quantify and anyways people are terrible at measuring short term pleasure vs long term paint.

You're upsetting.

I'm sorry you are upset. Subjective utility is a measure that can include whatever factors are important to someone. Economists have been trying to quantify such softer factors for years (check out some of Daniel Kahneman's research if you are interested). In fact, the very definition of subjective utility involves personal judgment that goes beyond purely quantifiable factors.

[AT9]

This thread is entertaining. I don't think FIU/Stetson are horrible options IF:

1. You're ok with no biglaw/a lowish starting salary.
2. You have ties to the area.
3. You want to work in the region (S. Florida for FIU, Tampa/central Florida for Stetson).
4. You emerge with very little debt.

However, of the non-T14s + (maybe) Vandy and Emory, UF/FSU are your best options for Florida.