Quote from mom Forum

[jhudenbalger]

Remember what ever program and school you chose, you want to be at the top. Better to be a big fish than a small fish! Read " David and Goliath" by Gladwell. Really good book about that.

I can't help but listen to my mother, but I know some here will disagree. Any truth in this in terms of choosing a law school?

[lawschool2014hopeful]

I think you misunderstood his argument.

He is not saying that big fish in a small pond is always better, but that going to the "highest ranked possible" can have some detrimental effects for some individuals.

However that argument is almost completely irrelevant with law school, given the fact that lower ranked (non-t-14s) and t-14s have gigantic differences in employment rate

[rinkrat19]

Yes, it's better to be at the top, but law school grades are extremely unpredictable to the point of being arbitrary, so choosing a lower-ranked school because you think you'll be smarter than all your classmates and kill the curve is a bad plan. Better to attend a school where it's not a disaster to be median.

[lakers180]

.

[muskies970]

Remember what ever program and school you chose, you want to be at the top. Better to be a big fish than a small fish! Read " David and Goliath" by Gladwell. Really good book about that.

I can't help but listen to my mother, but I know some here will disagree. Any truth in this in terms of choosing a law school?

my 2 cents fwiw:

I think being a big fish in a small pond is a great idea for undergrad. It's a great way to stand out and get to know professors, and propel you into the next level whether it's a PHD program, law school, or even the business world (or whatever else). In undergrad the name of the school (except for maybe the few elite) isn't that important, but networking and doing well are. A lot of undergrad also correlates to being the "big fish in a small pond", grades are much more based on showing up (in small schools) and it's easy to get close to professors again at small schools.

However, at law school I don't think this is quite as possible. It's more difficult to be in touch with professors, your performance is based much more strictly on a curve, etc... Furthermore, a law school's rank really is important, so that being at median at top schools is greater than top 20% at a lower ranked school. While being top 1-5% and "big fish" may seem achievable, it isn't guaranteed.

Also, if being "big fish" is your goal, I would just choose a school with a smaller class size overall, not based on ranking. However being in a big pond, even if only a small or mediocre sized fish, still affords the opportunity for much more exploring and different experiences. So it's not necessarily a bad thing.

[PepperJack]

I actually agree with this argument for people who have full scholarship options. The LSAT explains 15% of the correlation with 1L grades overall, but the actual data shows it's actually only a few percentage points for most students, and actually does a damn good job with extremes (10+ points). So if someone has a 4.0 and after studying intensely for months can only snag a 160 then it might be smarter to take a full ride to a slightly lower school over sticker to a low t-14. However, the danger of taking "big fish in a little pond" advice is this is more likely to be used to justify not retaking and going to that lower ranked school at the same price as a t-14. I'm sure that even at a TTTT there are 1-2 people who would make law review anywhere that the #'s fail to accurately measure so when you're going to some schools there will really only be 1 fish who survives in the whole pond, or even an extinct pond so it's not really accurate. In the present economy there are very, very few schools where just being a median fish is sufficient. Literally, there's probably only 3-5.

In general, once you get to the fish and pond arguments you're probably over thinking it already. Metaphors are terrible baselines for making major life choices, and there's not really any ponds or anything like that. The plain truth is that when you look at firm's websites, most of them went to good schools so evidently the pond analogy is bad in terms of big fish or little fish. The big fish tend to all be in the same pond, because evidence shows they are eating all the little fish, thus becoming bigger. You can bank on being The Lone Survivor in the little pond, but that's assuming you're the Mark Wahlberg of shitty law schools.

[drawstring]

I think one of the best things about being in the biggest ponds (e.g. HYS) is that even if you're a fairly small fish your options will probably be good. There are just too many variables at play for me to bank on being near the top of my class, even if it's at school where I'm comfortably above medians, and that's usually what you need to do to land a decent legal job from outside the T14 .

[Cicero76]

Who cares about being the biggest fish in law school? T-14s make you the big fish in the legal employment world, which is infinitely more important. Assuming you beat median, the OCI gods, etc etc etc

[patogordo]

you aren't a big fish, bro. your LSAT score doesn't mean shit.

[chneyo]

...

[M&ADE]

Remember what ever program and school you chose, you want to be at the top. Better to be a big fish than a small fish! Read " David and Goliath" by Gladwell. Really good book about that.

I can't help but listen to my mother, but I know some here will disagree. Any truth in this in terms of choosing a law school?

In addition to what other posters have said, his comments were not just directed at the school but also the type of major. You can be a math genius in your hometown of Middle-of-Nowhere, SD and then you go to Harvard thinking you're Baby Einstein and then, BOOM, you see that you're middle of the pack, get discouraged/disheartened, and realize you'll never be at the top of your class.

Also, remember that statistics dictates that only half the class can be in the top 50%. No matter how warm and fuzzy you feel about your chances at performing well in LS, the curve is a dream-crusher. The difference between a "A" and a "B" can be relatively small sometimes. In order to mitigate your risk, the best best is to go to (1) T-14 or (2) top regional school where you want to work (w/ scholly $$). Which school will depend on your career goals (Big/Mid Law, Clerkships, PI, etc.)

I mean, do you want to be #1 in your class at the University of Phoenix (or whatever they call it these days)? Not everyone can Sparkle from Brooklyn Law School and become a SCOTUS clerk from a TTTT.

TL;DR - Going to the best school you can get into is by no means a guarantee of your desired employment outcome, but it does provide more cushion/leeway for those who do not perform as well as they hope. Alternatively, lots of scholarship $$ to strong regional schools has the same effect.

[banjo]

I agree with the posters who say you cannot predict your law school grades. You're better off being a regular fish in the the T14 pond, where all the biglaw firms fish.

[theramblingfool]

.

[cron1834]

There's also the issue of basing important life decisions off of the pseudo-scientific extrapolations and unwarranted whims of Malcolm Gladwell.

[PepperJack]

You can't predict LS grades as a 0L but you kind of need to be confident in order to do well, just able to see your shittiness to make it less shitty.

I mean data does show that URMs tend to struggle as a group, but are the same when they attend schools where their numbers are around the median. That's why it makes sense for them to my opinion take a full ride over sticker because it seems likelier to balance out. At the same price though, you always do the t-12, no question. It's also unclear how the curves differ between particular schools. Are UVA and UPenn equally difficult? Nobody knows. I do know that a TTT is much easier to get top 10 percent in than a t-14 because of a friend explaining how over half the class couldn't keep up with 5 pages a day of reading.

[ManoftheHour]

big fish and a big pond

go big or go home

[heythatslife]

Who cares about being the biggest fish in law school? T-14s make you the big fish in the legal employment world, which is infinitely more important. Assuming you beat median, the OCI gods, etc etc etc

This.

[norkanite]

.