Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=122895
Initially? Not much. PD/DA, shitlaw.jigsaw22 wrote:From a tier 1 (top 50 school)? What job prospects, if any, do students have that finish below median?
I don't think that's what Anonymous posting is for. Says Hillary Duff.Anonymous User wrote:You die. Dun dun dun dunnnnnnnn...
ResolutePear wrote:I'd be hardpressed to continue lifelaw schoolunder the median.
Yeah, and kinda surprising. $15 for sex isn't normal? I've been getting a great deal then!MrKappus wrote:OK that meth ad is seriously disturbing.
Anonymous User wrote:You die. Dun dun dun dunnnnnnnn...
These didn't need to be anonymous.Anonymous User wrote:no job offer and tons of debts haunting you
What I like about that anti-meth ad is that it implies that the problem with meth is not that you'll turn to prostitution but rather that once you turn to prostitution you will charge too little. As long as you're getting $200 for sex you're doing just fine. Now I have no issue with prostitution, but it's refreshing to see that kind of attitude from the government.MrKappus wrote:OK that meth ad is seriously disturbing.
Do most of the people under median drop out after 1st year?ResolutePear wrote:I'd be hardpressed to continue law school under the median.
If they had half a brain, they would.jigsaw22 wrote:Do most of the people under median drop out after 1st year?ResolutePear wrote:I'd be hardpressed to continue law school under the median.
Now here is a question that's really going to boggle you:bedbathandbeheadings wrote:If they had half a brain, they would.jigsaw22 wrote:Do most of the people under median drop out after 1st year?ResolutePear wrote:I'd be hardpressed to continue law school under the median.
The problem isn't the number so much as what that number is supposed to represent. We all know that RA'ing after you graduate shouldn't count in those employment statistics, but somehow they do. I personally think things far more dire at T50 schools than 50%.Cleareyes wrote:What I like about that anti-meth ad is that it implies that the problem with meth is not that you'll turn to prostitution but rather that once you turn to prostitution you will charge too little. As long as you're getting $200 for sex you're doing just fine. Now I have no issue with prostitution, but it's refreshing to see that kind of attitude from the government.MrKappus wrote:OK that meth ad is seriously disturbing.
As for OPs question, I think people are being considerably too pessimistic. If we can agree that 98.5% employment figures are BS, I don't think that 50% is the right number for most good schools either. People below median at good but not great schools probably have not screwed themselves for the most part. They may have to work really hard to find a job and may not make a lot of money for several years, but I think most people here have too pessimistic a view of what happens if you miss the biglaw boat from a place like Hastings or BYU.
If that's true, then what jobs are schools using to pad the difference between gainfully employed grads and their reported employment statistic? UC-Davis, for example, purportedly has 97.3% "employed at graduation." If things are "far more dire" than 50%, what's making up the difference between (hypothetically) ~40% employed in real legal jobs that have futures and 97? That'd be a whole lot of RA's. I very much think the high 90's employment stats are bunk, but I also think your view's a tad dark.PKSebben wrote:The problem isn't the number so much as what that number is supposed to represent. We all know that RA'ing after you graduate shouldn't count in those employment statistics, but somehow they do. I personally think things far more dire at T50 schools than 50%.
Not hard to get to 97% employed when you don't survey or get responses from half the class. Just like its not hard to get a median salary of 160,000 when you are only talking about people in private practice, and you only survey a third of your graduates in private practice.MrKappus wrote:If that's true, then what jobs are schools using to pad the difference between gainfully employed grads and their reported employment statistic? UC-Davis, for example, purportedly has 97.3% "employed at graduation." If things are "far more dire" than 50%, what's making up the difference between (hypothetically) ~40% employed in real legal jobs that have futures and 97? That'd be a whole lot of RA's. I very much think the high 90's employment stats are bunk, but I also think you're view's a tad dark.PKSebben wrote:The problem isn't the number so much as what that number is supposed to represent. We all know that RA'ing after you graduate shouldn't count in those employment statistics, but somehow they do. I personally think things far more dire at T50 schools than 50%.