Why do Third Tier and Fourth Tier Law Schools even exist? Forum

[scionb4]

They exist because the LSAT is an imperfect test. This whole discussion is predicated on the assumption that the kid who scores 155 will never have what it takes to be a thoughtful and successful lawyer and that the school he goes to won't provide him with the skills to be a successful lawyer (or at least not as well as the kid with a 165 at a T30.). These are deeply flawed presumptions and assume that the LSAT actually tests the skills needed to be a successful lawyer.

Also, i don't think anyone can dispute the fact that cheap, state schools are a VERY smart option for many people. They are highly regarded within the state, charge a reasonable tuition, and offer local options for students who don't want to move too far away from home.

You DEFINITELY aren't stuck in a tier 3 or 4 with a 155. I am living proof of that considering my acceptances. I do have a 3.8 and am part Mexican though, that probably helped.

I had a 3.8 from a top international undergrad, but couldn't break 160 on the LSAT so ended up at a cheap state school that is at risk of falling out of the top 100. After 3/4 of 1L I can tell you that the LSAT, especially logic games, are pretty much BS for predicting law school grades. Without TTTs I may not have been able to go to law school, but now I'm sitting pretty in the top 10% and looking at a good shot of a transfer acceptance to Georgetown.

What I DO think needs to change is the asymmetry of information regarding lower ranked schools. They should all be honest and transparent about the fact that most graduates will be starting out making 50k. I have far too many friends that definitely think law school=$$$, regardless of the school. If TTTs become more transparent, I see no reason why everyone shouldn't be given the chance to take the gamble, even if the odds may be against them. After all, the cream always rises to the top.

Unless it's made in China and has lead content.

[mstiger]

I scored a 165 on the LSAT and hold approximately a 3.6 GPA. To be honest, I don't give a flying frick about the US News Rankings/Tiers/Prestige. I hate the urban lifestyle, and I don't want to work for a large firm in a metro area. I'm not the "yes sir", wang sucking type, so I know that I would not mesh well in that environment. I was raised in the south, and I love the south.

I have wanted to be a criminal defense attorney my entire life. I plan to start my own firm after graduation.

Many posters on this site remind me of Peter Keating, one of the main characters in Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead. So concerned with appearance...

To answer you question, third and fourth tier law schools exist, at least partially, for people like me.

[qualster]

I scored a 165 on the LSAT and hold a 3.6 GPA. To be honest, I don't give a flying frick about the US News Rankings/Tiers/Prestige. I hate the urban lifestyle, and I don't want to work for a large firm in a metro area. I'm not the "yes sir", wang sucking type, so I know that I would not mesh well in that environment. I was raised in the south, and I love the south.

I have wanted to be a criminal defense attorney my entire life. I plan to start my own firm after graduation.

Many posters on this site remind me of Peter Keating, one of the main characters in Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead. So concerned with appearance...

To answer you question, third and fourth tier law schools exist, at least partially, for people like me.

Booya! Yeah, I've never been able to toe the line either. Corporate law probably wouldn't work for me. I'm looking for a worthy cause and a fight. Class action work, civil suits. Money isn't my deal though. I made a good chunk for a couple of years. Did nothing for me. Boring really.

[jcc9q3]

This post is ridiculous. If you dont have to work in a huge market(ie.Chicago, LA, New york) a third or fourth tier law school is absolutely non-punitive. For example, if you would be ok with working in Kansas City, if you graduated from UMKC in the top third of your class you'd be fine. IF you were in the top ten percent you would be looking at making 100k at a large firm first year out. Tulsa is the same story. If your grades are good you have great opportunities in Oklahoma City or in Springfield Mo. Same with Arkansas in regards to little rock. Hard work and personality go a long way. Some nerd who spent four years at an ivy league school in undergrad eating Cheetos in his dorm the goes to Notre Dame better be great at tax law. Litigation is about performing under pressure, hard work and personality.

[LSATfromNC]

FIU = 11K per year in one of the nations top 10 legal markets...for a Florida resident who wants to practice in South Florida it is an inexpensive option...is Miami a better option? probably, but not if you dont want to spend 40K per year in tuition

Yeah, you're going to need the money you saved when you graduate from the law school with the worst employment statistics in the nation. (I mean, 21% employed at grad...are you kidding me?)

Would you rather they embellish their stats like some other schools? Perhaps they could hire some of their grads to clean up around the school, but just until they report theirs stats to US News.

[[1L]Hopeful]

So to prove my original point: U.S. needs more attorneys because we are spread out. Canada doesn't because they aren't.

because only criminal defenses need attorneys?

[Podunk21]

if you can't muster above a 155 or so on the LSAT maybe law just isn't their thing.

That is a bit of a "leap"....

[mb88]

if you can't muster above a 155 or so on the LSAT maybe law just isn't their thing.

That is a bit of a "leap"....

I dunno. My issue with it is more the number he's chosen than the concept he's espousing.

If you score anywhere in the 150s, I think you've probably got what it takes to do legal work. I don't think you're going to be particularly brilliant at the law, nor do I think that range is acceptable for academia or judgeships, but I think you could be a fine trial attorney if you've got a good personality.

Now, when you start to dip into the 140s and below, that's when I believe that you should look elsewhere for a career. The LSAT might not be able to predict intelligence or skill at the law, but it does test you for reading comprehension and logical reasoning, two of the most important skills a lawyer uses. If those two skills are not developed enough to score above the 140s, then you just simply don't possess the correct skill-set to work in the law.

Nobody is entitled to be a lawyer. This may sound like a broken record, but nobody would dare claim that the math-impaired should still be allowed to become engineers, why should those who have immense difficulty with reading comp be allowed to become attorneys?

[too old for this sh*]

if you can't muster above a 155 or so on the LSAT maybe law just isn't their thing.

That is a bit of a "leap"....

More than a bit...as has been noted on more than one occasion, the actual practice of law has little to do with what one does on the LSAT. I still have yet to have a client file that asked me about dinosaurs or any of the other nonsense seen on past administrations of the test. I've also got people in this State that will call and ask for me by name on certain sentencing matters before they will ask for any of the partners...

The fact that one's ability to get into school depends so much upon a scan-tron test is a sad commentary on the educational system as a collective whole...

[bees]

why should those who have immense difficulty with reading comp be allowed [strike]to become attorneys[/strike] do anything except be sent back to school?

Learn to read, people.

[Kobe_Teeth]

Better question, why does thread exist? Most TLS'ers consider themselves to be so above the Tier-3 and Tier-4 schools that I'm surprised they waste so much time in deriding them.

I understand the broad argument of course...the 1 or 2 TTT and TTTT that steal that last BigLaw job away from the guy who finished dead last at GULC or Cornell but honestly, what's the point?

Contrarily, to a degree, future applicants should thank this website for the constructive warnings given to them about their decisions (keyword - "constructive").

[texanokie]

Real answer: Because the ABA lacks the foresight of the AMA.


Politically correct answer: Everyone should have the opportunity to be whatever they want! It doesn't matter if you score in the 40th percentile on the aptitude test for entrance, come on in! *Insert your kindergarten teacher's "you can be anything you want" speech here*.

Can you imagine what would happen if the American Medical Association adopted that mentality?

I can imagine if states required a comprehensive exam that covered (theoretically) everything a doctor is supposed to know to obtain a medical license, like the legal profession has with the Bar exam, it wouldn't really matter. Of course, I don't even want to think how long (time and preparation-wise) such an exam would take for a medical license.

Because people who are dumb enough to get <150 on their LSAT are apparently not smart enough to realize they shouldn't go to law school.

Last I checked almost half of the people who take the LSAT score lower than 150... so you're saying half the people who take the LSAT are dumb? If they are, it's only because most of them didn't take the adequate steps to prepare for the test. Lord knows most of us on this board would've freaked out if our actual score had wound up being what we scored on our first practice test.

[BruceBarr]

Real answer: Because the ABA lacks the foresight of the AMA.


Politically correct answer: Everyone should have the opportunity to be whatever they want! It doesn't matter if you score in the 40th percentile on the aptitude test for entrance, come on in! *Insert your kindergarten teacher's "you can be anything you want" speech here*.

Can you imagine what would happen if the American Medical Association adopted that mentality?

I can imagine if states required a comprehensive exam that covered (theoretically) everything a doctor is supposed to know to obtain a medical license, like the legal profession has with the Bar exam, it wouldn't really matter. Of course, I don't even want to think how long (time and preparation-wise) such an exam would take for a medical license.

Because people who are dumb enough to get <150 on their LSAT are apparently not smart enough to realize they shouldn't go to law school.

Last I checked almost half of the people who take the LSAT score lower than 150... so you're saying half the people who take the LSAT are dumb? If they are, it's only because most of them didn't take the adequate steps to prepare for the test. Lord knows most of us on this board would've freaked out if our actual score had wound up being what we scored on our first practice test.

1/2 the people who take the LSAT think they're smart enough to do well without studying. So yea, that makes them dumb.

I think you're dumb too for not thinking they're dumb.

[texanokie]

1/2 the people who take the LSAT think they're smart enough to do well without studying. So yea, that makes them dumb.

I think you're dumb too for not thinking they're dumb.

I think you're dumb because you obviously can't read critically. After all, I only said that exact same thing in my post.

o you're saying half the people who take the LSAT are dumb? If they are, it's only because most of them didn't take the adequate steps to prepare for the test. Lord knows most of us on this board would've freaked out if our actual score had wound up being what we scored on our first practice test.

[T14_Scholly]

I'm not the "yes sir", wang sucking type...

lol

OP is elitist and materialist, as are many TLSers.

[sleepygirl]

I can imagine if states required a comprehensive exam that covered (theoretically) everything a doctor is supposed to know to obtain a medical license, like the legal profession has with the Bar exam, it wouldn't really matter. Of course, I don't even want to think how long (time and preparation-wise) such an exam would take for a medical license.

Do you mean the USMLE, aka "The Boards", which is a 3 (but really 4) part exam that med students take at different times during the span of their education? Because that test is a beast and they STILL don't let just anybody into medical school.

[texanokie]

Do you mean the USMLE, aka "The Boards", which is a 3 (but really 4) part exam that med students take at different times during the span of their education? Because that test is a beast and they STILL don't let just anybody into medical school.

They don't let just anybody into law school, either. It's not as restrictive and the washout rate isn't near that as med school, but it's still pretty selective.

[rbgrocio]

Before someone retorts, why does any law school outside of the top 14 exist har har, lets be reasonable. A person graduating from the top law schools in his or her state will always have good job prospects in the future. As a Floridian, I would include UF FSU and even UM in this category. However, certain schools, like Nova, FIU, FAMU have no purpose. Even if you graduated from these schools who would hire you over a UF or FSU grad? It just seems like people are throwing 3 years of their life down the drain. These people need to realize that if you can't muster above a 155 or so on the LSAT maybe law just isn't their thing.

I go to FIU and got a paid-summer job at the firm where I want to work upon graduation. I got accepted to better schools (such as UM and FSU) and I still decided to go to FIU. The key is to set yourself apart (get a good GPA, beat that 2.4-2.6 curve, do law review, moot court, etc)... I do not regret going to FIU at all. If I wanted to practice in NY, going to FIU would be a dumb decision, but I want to practice in Miami, and My goal is not to make a ton of money. I just need enough to live comfortably. My husband also has a good degree, so really making 75k a year will not kill me. Different people have different goals, and FIU grads are well-established in the community and making OK salaries.

[rbgrocio]

FIU = 11K per year in one of the nations top 10 legal markets...for a Florida resident who wants to practice in South Florida it is an inexpensive option...is Miami a better option? probably, but not if you dont want to spend 40K per year in tuition

Yeah, you're going to need the money you saved when you graduate from the law school with the worst employment statistics in the nation. (I mean, 21% employed at grad...are you kidding me?)

93 percent are employed 9 months after graduation and according to the TLS profile they make an average of 75k. (those in the private sector).

[elkapitan87]

My Dad went to a third tier law school, but was able to build a very successful private practice over 15 years. he couldn't land a job at a firm, had to start from scratch, but it worked out pretty well. big law may be out of the question, but for those going to T3 schools and even T4 schools you are not precluded from making big money in the end. You'll just have to do it on your own terms. I'm from a big legal market city and the majority of the lawyers who have their own small firms, some who make seven figures, went to T3 and T4 schools. the school doesn't make the lawyer, it just opens up doors for them.

[Slimpee]

Some schools are prevalent in their region.

Texas Tech = vast opportunities in West Texas

South Texas College of Law = one of the top ten USNWR trial advocacy programs

Hawaii = gold if you want to practice on the island


T3 and T4 schools have their niches. If you don't desire that niche, don't apply. If you do, it is a fabulous opportunity, often accompanied by $$$ if you have the numbers.

In my cycle, I've applied to all, including T14, T30, and TTT. I would attend a TTT (Texas Tech) over a T30 (Illinois) because I desire Texas employment. Illinois is an unbelievable school, no doubt--but carries little weight in my intended career state. I would take a T3 school over a T1 in this instance.

Many of you will disagree. That is fine. But I will receive in-state tuition and networking opportunities exceeding that available to me at a considerably higher ranking school.

TITCR. I can't believe the nearsightednesses of many posters on TLS. Hey, 21-yr-old UG student, you don't know it all so stfu...

Remember, William Mitchell, traditionally a TTT/TTTT produced a Supreme Court Chief Justice.

(sorry if this point has been expressed before. I am far too lazy to go through 7 pages)

[Grizz]

My Dad went to a third tier law school, but was able to build a very successful private practice over 15 years. he couldn't land a job at a firm, had to start from scratch, but it worked out pretty well. big law may be out of the question, but for those going to T3 schools and even T4 schools you are not precluded from making big money in the end. You'll just have to do it on your own terms. I'm from a big legal market city and the majority of the lawyers who have their own small firms, some who make seven figures, went to T3 and T4 schools. the school doesn't make the lawyer, it just opens up doors for them.

While your dad succeeded, how many of his TTT colleagues in the sames situation left the law altogether? The rate of failure for small businesses in 90%. Also keep in mind the market wasn't as crowded for new lawyers when you dad was making his bones.

TTT is not a good idea, generally, unless it truly dominates a region or is really cheap.

[Grizz]

FIU = 11K per year in one of the nations top 10 legal markets...for a Florida resident who wants to practice in South Florida it is an inexpensive option...is Miami a better option? probably, but not if you dont want to spend 40K per year in tuition

Yeah, you're going to need the money you saved when you graduate from the law school with the worst employment statistics in the nation. (I mean, 21% employed at grad...are you kidding me?)

93 percent are employed 9 months after graduation and according to the TLS profile they make an average of 75k. (those in the private sector).

These stats have basically no meaning, as "employment 9 months after graduation" counts McDonald's and law firms both as employed, and I bet their survey has a terrible response rate similar to most schools in its echelon.

[Grizz]

The key is to set yourself apart (get a good GPA, beat that 2.4-2.6 curve, do law review, moot court, etc)

Too bad everyone wants that, but not everyone can achieve that result, thanks to a curve and limited lr and moot court spots. I still maintain that one should not go anywhere where he/she would not be happy at the median.

[Grizz]

Remember, William Mitchell, traditionally a TTT/TTTT produced a Supreme Court Chief Justice.

Warren Burger, in 1931, 79 years ago. How relevant is this today? Answer: basically not at all.