Top Law Schools

Could't find answers to this question in the search. How should you aim to answer whats the hardest thing about law school? Im always stumped by this one, and just say balancing different types of law at once, but say how i overcame it, and relate that to juggling multiple cases. But is there a better answer? I honestly dont find anything THAT hard, i just want to give the best answer possible.

"nothing. its easy"

Easy.

The fact that you don't learn anything productive in regards to the practice of law.

EVERY LAWYER knows that having a J.D. doesn't mean jack shit. The only thing your "license" does is give you the ability to commit "malpractice".

You still don't know anything about the practice of law nor are you of any financial value to any employer.

Best thing to say in the interview is, "The hardest part is not developing skill necessary to become a productive attorney the first day I'm sworn in."

The interviewer will appreciate that you have enough self-awareness to know that you don't know shit.

Kivan wrote:Easy.

The fact that you don't learn anything productive in regards to the practice of law.

EVERY LAWYER knows that having a J.D. doesn't mean jack shit. The only thing your "license" does is give you the ability to commit "malpractice".

You still don't know anything about the practice of law nor are you of any financial value to any employer.

Best thing to say in the interview is, "The hardest part is not developing skill necessary to become a productive attorney the first day I'm sworn in."

The interviewer will appreciate that you have enough self-awareness to know that you don't know shit.

no why would you say this to a potential employer. you're basically acknowledging you lack the skills for the job (sure firms know this, but isn't self-awareness, it's showing how bad you are at selling yourself). if you do take this road you have to be extraordinarily tactful and immediately counter with how you're uniquely qualified b/c of the externship/clinical work/PT/whatever you did to supplement so that you can be a productive attorney from day one. yes it's probably bullshit but interviews are not therapy sessions, total disclosure is not a virtue

Just talk about whichever class you found the most challenging so you can kill the next question with the same stone. Property is always a safe bet since apparently people used to find RAP traumatizing.

OutoftheWoods wrote:I honestly dont find anything THAT hard

The worst thing you can do is say this.

The second worst thing you can do is actually believe this.

Just pick random class that is unrelated to what you want to do. So, if transactional, civil procedure. Etc.

this is a softball question to get you talking. don't over think it.

Do people really get asked this a lot in interviews? I easily had 100+ interviews (counting multiple interviews on callbacks) for various positions while in law school, and not one person asked me this question.

rpupkin wrote:Do people really get asked this a lot in interviews? I easily had 100+ interviews (counting multiple interviews on callbacks) for various positions while in law school, and not one person asked me this question.

As a 1L, I've had one interview and I was asked this question.

The hardest thing about law school is dealing with all the law students.

specific interview questions (especially something like this) are tough because every interviewee should be pitching a theme from the get go. the theme should be why everything in the last X years has led you to the seat you are sitting in now and why you are the right person for the job (capable, easy to work with, and in it for the long haul).

I could easily imagine a very compelling interview using the answer above that law school doesnt prepare you properly (a little humility in an interview is great) while at the same time the candidate still believes they are the right person for the job.
Another answer could be something like you think your classmates are really competitive which stifles collaboration and bouncing ideas.
You could also say something like the grades being based on one exam. That you think real world performance is based on the long haul which incorporates feedback and adjustment according to the feedback.

You can't think of an interview as a series of questions like a test that you either get right or wrong. It's much more about telling a story of why you and the firm belong together.

I always said learning how to apportion time efficiently when u have too much on your plate, learning to work effectively as a team (study group), and the steep learning curve that you need to overcome largely on your own without handholding. Basically said how I learned to overcome these challenges blah blah which provided nice transition into discussion about life at a firm or something.

My general answer was something along the lines of "transitioning back into being a student in an academic environment etc etc after being out of college for X years." It was always received just fine.

JenDarby wrote:My general answer was something along the lines of "transitioning back into being a student in an academic environment etc etc after being out of college for X years." It was always received just fine.

Me too. It's a money answer if you aren't k-jd

The hardest thing for me was the last year. I enjoyed LS much more than undergrad (English) and grad school (CompSci). But it was enjoyable only for the 1st year. Second year was pretty much the same sort of crap, just different topics. By the third year, I was just taking whatever I could fit into my schedule just to get the darn thing over with.

Edit: Oops. Glanced at this thread real fast at work and I didn't realize OP was asking it for interviews. So ignore my answer.

Nothing, really.

Try to act like it is hard and they will conclude there's no way you will be able to do the job of an associate.

"all the damn Vampires"

edit: oh wait, that would be if they asked "one thing you could never stand about law school"

Kivan wrote:Easy.

The fact that you don't learn anything productive in regards to the practice of law.

EVERY LAWYER knows that having a J.D. doesn't mean jack shit. The only thing your "license" does is give you the ability to commit "malpractice".

You still don't know anything about the practice of law nor are you of any financial value to any employer.

Best thing to say in the interview is, "The hardest part is not developing skill necessary to become a productive attorney the first day I'm sworn in."

The interviewer will appreciate that you have enough self-awareness to know that you don't know shit.

That'd be an auto-ding at any legal job I've ever worked. It's obnoxious, takes an overly simplified perspective on the role law school plays in lawyer training, and implies that you are probably not one of the more invested students at your school. I've always been fortunate to work in very competitive places and although we recognize that there is much about our work that law school does not train you for, we also are selective enough that we can afford to decline any applicant who fails to recognize the many, many ways in which law school does help develop the skill necessary to be a good attorney.