Top Law Schools

http://education.yahoo.net/degrees/arti ... alary.html

Secret #1: Get an advanced degree
Earn a college degree and you'll earn more money than without one. Earn an advanced degree and you'll earn even more money. Seems logical...because it's true! According to a 2007 U.S. Census Bureau report, those with advanced degrees earned nearly $15,000 more annually than those with only a bachelor's. In many cases, those who obtain a graduate degree take on extra responsibility and income. For example, attorneys earn almost double the salary of paralegals. Even part-time lawyers can earn nearly $75k.

BLS 2008 median salary: $124,750
Career training secrets: Bachelor's degree in business or a related field; Juris Doctorate from an accredited law school (required).

This article is from TODAY. Later in the article it mentions an online MBA being a route to a 75k salary. And people wonder why idiots are still enrolling in places like Cooley and Thomas Jefferson at full tuition. The idea that lawyers are all rich still pervades our society.

I especially like the part time lawyers making 75k gem.

Crap, the attorneys I know make a hell of a lot more than double what the paralegals make.

I thought for a second there that BLS meant Brooklyn.

Then I clicked the article and realized it was Bureau of Labor Statistics.

This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

Foozle wrote:I thought for a second there that BLS meant Brooklyn.

Then I clicked the article and realized it was Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Lmao! Same Here! I was like that median is way to high for Brooklyn.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

Actually a few biglaw partners making $1m would skew the mean, but not the median.

You're right that the figure is probably from before the recent economic troubles. Not to mention I'm sure the salary numbers are self-reported so you have 1) people with lower salaries don't report and 2) some people flat-out lie.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

Wrongggggg

The only salary that is relevant to the median, is the salary that the middle person makes.

IE. you have a 1000 people, #1-#499 earn 30k p/yr, #500 eanrs 125k p/yr, and #501-#1000 can make 100000000000000000k p/yr. The median is still 125k.

Having a JD =/= being an attorney

My biggest fear is not working in a low(ish) paying legal field, it's having to pay back law school while unable to find a job that law school was necessary for. I think that would be especially demoralizing. And statistics like these totally ignore those people.

jrobby6 wrote:

Foozle wrote:I thought for a second there that BLS meant Brooklyn.

Then I clicked the article and realized it was Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Lmao! Same Here! I was like that median is way to high for Brooklyn.

But sadly, it's probably close to what they report.

Satoren wrote:

jrobby6 wrote:

Foozle wrote:I thought for a second there that BLS meant Brooklyn.

Then I clicked the article and realized it was Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Lmao! Same Here! I was like that median is way to high for Brooklyn.

But sadly, it's probably close to what they report.

In case you guys are curious:

http://www.brooklaw.edu/career/empstats/

Note the 78% response rate for salary data (grads in private practice only, class of 2008.) This is actually higher than I thought it would be.

Satoren wrote:

ToTransferOrNot wrote:This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

Wrongggggg

The only salary that is relevant to the median, is the salary that the middle person makes.

IE. you have a 1000 people, #1-#499 earn 30k p/yr, #500 eanrs 125k p/yr, and #501-#1000 can make 100000000000000000k p/yr. The median is still 125k.

And I fail at remembering the difference between mean/median/mode. This is why I'm in law school--all I had to do with numbers with my music undergrad was count to 12 without getting lost.

Also: The number is still useless/misleading.

I feel like we need a sticky in each thread reminding people of what a mean/median are. This confusion happens pretty much everyday.

worldtraveler wrote:I feel like we need a sticky in each thread reminding people of what a mean/median are. This confusion happens pretty much everyday.

+ 234982735982739487239487

OperaSoprano wrote:

Satoren wrote:

jrobby6 wrote:

Foozle wrote:I thought for a second there that BLS meant Brooklyn.

Then I clicked the article and realized it was Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Lmao! Same Here! I was like that median is way to high for Brooklyn.

But sadly, it's probably close to what they report.

In case you guys are curious:

http://www.brooklaw.edu/career/empstats/

Note the 78% response rate for salary data (grads in private practice only, class of 2008.) This is actually higher than I thought it would be.

Also note that they do not include a median or mean salary for the total group graduates who enter private practice. Instead they break the range of reported salaries down by firm size, and tell us the median in each of those categories.

Using the distribution percentages in the chart, you can estimate that the average is around 100,000. Of course, the 22% that don't report are probably on the lower side of that figure.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

You need to reread the chapter on mean and median in your statistics book. Outliers generally don't skew medians, they skew means.

KimmyGibbler wrote:

ToTransferOrNot wrote:This news story is infuriating on so many levels.

Yes, the median salary for lawyers is $125k! Quick, everyone, go take out $180k in loans to attend whatever law school you can get in to!

Oh wait, you mean the median is completely skewed by partners in big firms making $1m, completely skewing the fact that a large proportion of people getting law degrees are going to be screwed? You mean the current median salaries were almost certainly calculated pre-2008? Damnit math.

You need to reread the chapter on mean and median in your statistics book. Outliers generally don't skew medians, they skew means.

You need to reread this thread. It's been covered.

So far only 3 people have corrected the guy who screwed up median versus mean. Let's see how many others will.

In case you guys are curious:

http://www.brooklaw.edu/career/empstats/

I'm not sure how exactly, but they have to be cooking the books here (that or people are lying)

They show 57% going to firms, and of those 45% going to firms of 100+. That's essentially claiming a 25% biglaw placement. No way that is true.

The article is obviously ridicules, but the median salary for an attorney is only misleading if taken out of context as it is in that article. What we often fail to remember here on TLS when looking at median salaries for attorneys in general is that they are not talking about first year salaries. 125k is probably pretty close to a typical salary for an attorney midway through a career, whether they are in-house, with a small or mid-sized firm, or with the government. What the number fails to account for is that many people who get JDs don't last very long in the field, and people who graduate from TTTs have a very small chance of staying in the field and having successful careers. The faulty conclusion is that getting a JD is a ticket to a 125k job, based on the absurd assumptions that all JDs are equally valuable and that all people who get JDs are equally talented and motivated to be successful. What, I think, you can reasonably conclude from the statistic is that if you go to a good school, work hard, and stick with a career in law you have a good shot at being successful and earning a good living over the course of your career.

worldtraveler wrote:I feel like we need a sticky in each thread reminding people of what a mean/median are. This confusion happens pretty much everyday.

pull the one off your back that reads "kick me" and use it

jcl2 wrote:The article is obviously ridicules, but the median salary for an attorney is only misleading if taken out of context as it is in that article. What we often fail to remember here on TLS when looking at median salaries for attorneys in general is that they are not talking about first year salaries. 125k is probably pretty close to a typical salary for an attorney midway through a career, whether they are in-house, with a small or mid-sized firm, or with the government. What the number fails to account for is that many people who get JDs don't last very long in the field, and people who graduate from TTTs have a very small chance of staying in the field and having successful careers. The faulty conclusion is that getting a JD is a ticket to a 125k job, based on the absurd assumptions that all JDs are equally valuable and that all people who get JDs are equally talented and motivated to be successful. What, I think, you can reasonably conclude from the statistic is that if you go to a good school, work hard, and stick with a career in law you have a good shot at being successful and earning a good living over the course of your career.

Si

Helmholtz wrote:Crap, the attorneys I know make a hell of a lot more than double what the paralegals make.

+1

...dammit.

hayman wrote:

jcl2 wrote:The article is obviously ridicules, but the median salary for an attorney is only misleading if taken out of context as it is in that article. What we often fail to remember here on TLS when looking at median salaries for attorneys in general is that they are not talking about first year salaries. 125k is probably pretty close to a typical salary for an attorney midway through a career, whether they are in-house, with a small or mid-sized firm, or with the government. What the number fails to account for is that many people who get JDs don't last very long in the field, and people who graduate from TTTs have a very small chance of staying in the field and having successful careers. The faulty conclusion is that getting a JD is a ticket to a 125k job, based on the absurd assumptions that all JDs are equally valuable and that all people who get JDs are equally talented and motivated to be successful. What, I think, you can reasonably conclude from the statistic is that if you go to a good school, work hard, and stick with a career in law you have a good shot at being successful and earning a good living over the course of your career.

Si

Maybe I'm just stupid, but what does "Si" mean?

jcl2 wrote:

hayman wrote:

jcl2 wrote:The article is obviously ridicules, but the median salary for an attorney is only misleading if taken out of context as it is in that article. What we often fail to remember here on TLS when looking at median salaries for attorneys in general is that they are not talking about first year salaries. 125k is probably pretty close to a typical salary for an attorney midway through a career, whether they are in-house, with a small or mid-sized firm, or with the government. What the number fails to account for is that many people who get JDs don't last very long in the field, and people who graduate from TTTs have a very small chance of staying in the field and having successful careers. The faulty conclusion is that getting a JD is a ticket to a 125k job, based on the absurd assumptions that all JDs are equally valuable and that all people who get JDs are equally talented and motivated to be successful. What, I think, you can reasonably conclude from the statistic is that if you go to a good school, work hard, and stick with a career in law you have a good shot at being successful and earning a good living over the course of your career.

Si

Maybe I'm just stupid, but what does "Si" mean?

--ImageRemoved--

Why do people always assume the self-reporting bias will scew towards the higher salaries?

Not saying it won't, but it seems you could make arguments either way, and I haven't seen any concrete documentation of the common belief.