Top Law Schools

The subject really says it all. I'm in with a full ride at a Tier 3 school, one that I like and have family ties to. However I have a lot of other applications out there at tier 2 and tier 1 schools and I'm sure I'll be hearing from them in the coming weeks and months. With my numbers, I doubt I'll be getting any scholarships from anyone in the Tier 1 range, and probably only very small offers in the tier 2 range, if any at all. Oh, and along with the full ride, I would have no housing costs (only food, books, and spending money costs).

So, if you had the full ride at the tier 3, and you're not going to make t-14's (I have apps in to two of them as reaches, but I doubt its happening) would you consider this?

To answer a couple of predictable questions:

- I would consider practicing in the same region that the tier 3 is in, but am not married to it and would probably enjoy someplace warmer eventually.
- My entire family lives in the region of the tier 3 and that is a factor for me. I've lived away from them for many years and I'd like to watch my nephews grow up.
- My LSAT score is ten points over their median.

Thanks in advance for your help with this. A month ago I considered this a deep safety school, but the more I think about graduating law school with literally zero debt in the company of my family.... the more I am tempted.

(I cannot name the tier 3 in question for privacy reasons)

You will take the full ride.

algren wrote:The subject really says it all. I'm in with a full ride at a Tier 3 school, one that I like and have family ties to. However I have a lot of other applications out there at tier 2 and tier 1 schools and I'm sure I'll be hearing from them in the coming weeks and months. With my numbers, I doubt I'll be getting any scholarships from anyone in the Tier 1 range, and probably only very small offers in the tier 2 range, if any at all. Oh, and along with the full ride, I would have no housing costs (only food, books, and spending money costs).

So, if you had the full ride at the tier 3, and you're not going to make t-14's (I have apps in to two of them as reaches, but I doubt its happening) would you consider this?

To answer a couple of predictable questions:

- I would consider practicing in the same region that the tier 3 is in, but am not married to it and would probably enjoy someplace warmer eventually.
- My entire family lives in the region of the tier 3 and that is a factor for me. I've lived away from them for many years and I'd like to watch my nephews grow up.
- My LSAT score is ten points over their median.

Thanks in advance for your help with this. A month ago I considered this a deep safety school, but the more I think about graduating law school with literally zero debt in the company of my family.... the more I am tempted.

(I cannot name the tier 3 in question for privacy reasons)

Maybe if you had in-state tuition at the T1, otherwise, I don't think think this is a difficult decision, most schools outside the T10 aren't worth full sticker.

What type of stipulations are on the scholarship? How much will you pay if you lose it?

I'm in the same situation. If it all works out my plan is to bust my ass for a year and transfer; any decrease in the debt u walk out with is a blessing but u just have to make sure u can do well enough to merit a transfer to better school.

Never go to a school with the expectation of transferring

Negrodamus wrote:Never go to a school with the expectation of transferring

^This.

fine. deleted.

jayn3 wrote:similar question: full ride + free housing at T3, or half scholly at T20?

sorry, but this is a silly question. if all things are equal you already know the answer to this

jayn3 wrote:similar question: full ride + free housing at T3, or half scholly at T20?

I fail to see how this is similar at all.

mistergoft wrote:

jayn3 wrote:similar question: full ride + free housing at T3, or half scholly at T20?

I fail to see how this is similar at all.

+millennium

betasteve wrote:Why has no one asked the OP his/her career goals? This is incredibly relevant, and making suggestions without having an idea of what the OP wants to do after graduation is rather reckless.

(This also serves to ask the OP what his/her career goals are).

My career goals are (as of now, I'll admit this could change slightly once I get in to law school and become familiar with other related areas of law) to work at strong firm in the private sector. I'm very interested in copyright law, particularly in regard to digital media. I also find what I've read about cyberlaw really fascinating. I would like to work on the litigation side of all this.

By "strong firm" I mean borderline big law. I know this is definitely more of a stretch at a tier three school, however, its possible if you finish at the top, make the right connections, etc. I'm lucky to have worked with (and to have befriended) lawyers at some of the best firms in Chicago for the last 5.5 years, so I think I have a leg up in the connection department. Being at or near the top of the class would also (likely) be easier at the tier three.

Thanks for the question betasteve, I should have outlined this in the OP.

orangeswarm wrote:What type of stipulations are on the scholarship? How much will you pay if you lose it?

Tuition at the tier three is hovering around 30K. Stipulations-wise, it will be easy to maintain. I don't have the note I took down about this with me at the moment, but I remember thinking that maintaining it shouldn't be a problem at all.

This short article is by a couple of profs who have written law review articles about U.S. News rankings, prospective law student decision-making, and legal employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1.

It may be helpful for your decision.

ggocat wrote:This short article is by a couple of profs who have written law review articles about U.S. News rankings, prospective law student decision-making, and legal employment: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1.

It may be helpful for your decision.

Oh, thanks, I will definitely check this out!

Take the full ride

mistergoft wrote:Maybe if you had in-state tuition at the T1, otherwise, I don't think think this is a difficult decision, most schools outside the T10 aren't worth full sticker.

This, although T17 would be my personal consideration for sticker.

algren wrote:

orangeswarm wrote:What type of stipulations are on the scholarship? How much will you pay if you lose it?

Tuition at the tier three is hovering around 30K. Stipulations-wise, it will be easy to maintain. I don't have the note I took down about this with me at the moment, but I remember thinking that maintaining it shouldn't be a problem at all.

1) I'm curious what "maintaining it shouldn't be a problem at all" means to you, personally. (i.e. trying to make sure you don't think keeping a 'B' average in law school is something that "shouldn't be a problem at all.")

2) You mentioned IP and cyber law. Do you have a technical background?

3) "Borderline big law" or "strong firm" jobs are rare for people coming straight out of law school. Even (especially?) in Chicago.

4) If you want to practice in Chicago, I would only recommend the following schools outside the T14:

HTH and good luck.

If the tier 3 you are referring to is Chicago Kent, do it. Within Chicago, if you want to do IP they have a great/growing reputation for being strong in this area. The full scholarship is something they give out a lot too, they seem to be generous enough with money that as you said, maintaining the scholly shouldn't be a problem.


*edit: I mean "strong" only in the context of being a tier 3 and being known for anything besides being a waste of money.

FerminaD wrote:If the tier 3 you are referring to is Chicago Kent, do it. Within Chicago, if you want to do IP they have a great/growing reputation for being strong in this area. The full scholarship is something they give out a lot too, they seem to be generous enough with money that as you said, maintaining the scholly shouldn't be a problem.


*edit: I mean "strong" only in the context of being a tier 3 and being known for anything besides being a waste of money.

Chicago Kent ≠ T3.

As for the bolded, I disagree. Schools do not give generous scholarships (i.e. full rides) to everyone; endowments just don't allow that. This leads me to believe there are stricter scholarship requirements with schools which give lots of full rides so they don't have to keep giving full rides all three years and can then offer them to unsuspecting 1Ls. Not saying this is necessarily the case in this instance, but I am saying OP should definitely beware scholarships with GPA conditions.

The tier three in question is not Kent, nor is it in Chicago. I have one close friend who graduated from Kent and another who is an admissions counselor there, but I have opted not to apply to any schools in the city. For school at least, I would like to leave for awhile and start in an environment with less social distractions than I currently have.

To Patrick's questions:

1) "Maintaining the scholarship shouldn't be a problem" = "Yes, I understand the grading scale and difficulty of law school is entirely different than undergrad and I still posit that I will be able to handle meeting the academic requirements of the scholarship." I see where you could be concerned as I initially phrased that in a "care-free" way as though law school is a walk in the park or something.

2) My undergraduate degrees are in history and humanities, however I have extensive work experience doing network administration, launching a company wide citrix environment, and other things of that nature. I don't plan on pursuing the more "technical" aspects of patent law anymore than is required. I won't sit for the patent test. My cyberlaw interest extends primarily into communications between government and people, and media sharing.

As an aside: I don't want to use this thread to have the "do you need a technical background to do IP" discussion. I believe strongly (and can support the argument) that you do not need one to successfully pursue many, many areas of IP and I'm operating under this premise.

3) I do understand biglaw/strong firm jobs are rare. If I work my tail off, get the grades, and don't get one - then I don't get one. I'm a hesitant to even use the word biglaw. Perhaps its better to say that I'm reaching for the strongest private sector job I can. Also Patrick, the article someone supplied just up the thread has a really interesting argument about reaching these type of jobs from various tiers vs. the debt incurred for law school.

Hopefully this helps along the discussion. Everyone's points have been really helpful so far.

Stringer Bell wrote:

mistergoft wrote:Maybe if you had in-state tuition at the T1, otherwise, I don't think think this is a difficult decision, most schools outside the T10 aren't worth full sticker.

This, although T17 would be my personal consideration for sticker.

1/2 scholly at BU or Emory >>> Ucla/UT/Vandy sticker (barring instate tuition at UT, of course, since I think instate at UCLA is still 35k/yr)

Full ride is the only way to justify going to a non T-14. So... full ride du du du du take it ez, du du du.

algren wrote:The tier three in question is not Kent, nor is it in Chicago. I have one close friend who graduated from Kent and another who is an admissions counselor there, but I have opted not to apply to any schools in the city. For school at least, I would like to leave for awhile and start in an environment with less social distractions than I currently have.

To Patrick's questions:

1) "Maintaining the scholarship shouldn't be a problem" = "Yes, I understand the grading scale and difficulty of law school is entirely different than undergrad and I still posit that I will be able to handle meeting the academic requirements of the scholarship." I see where you could be concerned as I initially phrased that in a "care-free" way as though law school is a walk in the park or something.

2) My undergraduate degrees are in history and humanities, however I have extensive work experience doing network administration, launching a company wide citrix environment, and other things of that nature. I don't plan on pursuing the more "technical" aspects of patent law anymore than is required. I won't sit for the patent test. My cyberlaw interest extends primarily into communications between government and people, and media sharing.

As an aside: I don't want to use this thread to have the "do you need a technical background to do IP" discussion. I believe strongly (and can support the argument) that you do not need one to successfully pursue many, many areas of IP and I'm operating under this premise.

3) I do understand biglaw/strong firm jobs are rare. If I work my tail off, get the grades, and don't get one - then I don't get one. I'm a hesitant to even use the word biglaw. Perhaps its better to say that I'm reaching for the strongest private sector job I can. Also Patrick, the article someone supplied just up the thread has a really interesting argument about reaching these type of jobs from various tiers vs. the debt incurred for law school.

Hopefully this helps along the discussion. Everyone's points have been really helpful so far.

@ the bolded. I cannot think of a worse idea than leaving Chicago for a T3 that's not within the city limits if you're set on practicing in the private sector long-term.

1) Point made, point taken
2) Technical background ≠ engineering/science degree, per se. However, strictly playing the statistics, which is how I personally tend to analyze these types of decisions, people who are filling IP (including copyright) tend to be those with either significant WE in the field (which it sounds like you might) or an engineering/science degree. Is it possible? Sure, but I equate that to saying it's 'possible' to land a biglaw job from John Marshall Chicago.
3) From a purely statistical viewpoint, I still stand firmly behind position number 4 above regarding working in Chicago. If you want to work there long-term, go to the best school you can get into, suck it up and deal with the 'social distractions,' and get good grades.

patrickd139 wrote: 3) From a purely statistical viewpoint, I still stand firmly behind position number 4 above regarding working in Chicago. If you want to work there long-term, go to the best school you can get into, suck it up and deal with the 'social distractions,' and get good grades.

Yes, but I'm not set on being in Chicago. At all really. It's great and I like it, but I also like moving around. I'm not married and don't have family in Chicago so I'm not tied there other than through friendships. I would entertain going back if my connections there afforded me the opportunity, but wouldn't stay just for that reason. If I was certain I wanted to be here, you better believe I'd be all over Kent. My Adcomm friend there said I'd qualify for at least 20K there probably and I think its a great school. But yeah, not set on being there.

Also, now I'm really shying away from the term "biglaw." I could work in Indianapolis, or Sacramento, or New Orleans or some other mid-large sized city at a solid firm and be very happy I think. I don't necessarily mean NYC/Chicago/SF/LA when I'm talking about the sort of jobs I'm interested in. Perhaps I'm mis-using the term a bit...