CUNY Law with a 148? Forum

[nwlawschool2013]

Once a CUNY graduate passes the bar, they are a lawyer just the same as a Harvard graduate.

If you're graduating from one of the top 20ish schools in the country, sure, you're going to be in a better position to get a job. For the rest of us, it's going to be about connections, luck, and what we've done with our time in school. Additionally, there are a LOT of people who don't go into private practice out of law school. There are marketing jobs for fashion brands in NYC who are looking for someone who has a law degree (why, who the hell knows) - but my point is, no one should be putting someone down or advising them against law school because of their LSAT or school choice. There are a LOT of things you can do with a law degree, and regardless, it is commendable that someone is willing to put in the work to pursue it - no matter WHAT their LSAT was or what school they graduated from.

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?


btw - CUNY is a public interest law school, and jobs in that field generally pay pretty shitty, especially in the beginning. 7% of the class making $57k just out of school is actually quite good.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Once a CUNY graduate passes the bar, they are a lawyer just the same as a Harvard graduate.

If you're graduating from one of the top 20ish schools in the country, sure, you're going to be in a better position to get a job. For the rest of us, it's going to be about connections, luck, and what we've done with our time in school. Additionally, there are a LOT of people who don't go into private practice out of law school. There are marketing jobs for fashion brands in NYC who are looking for someone who has a law degree (why, who the hell knows) - but my point is, no one should be putting someone down or advising them against law school because of their LSAT or school choice. There are a LOT of things you can do with a law degree, and regardless, it is commendable that someone is willing to put in the work to pursue it - no matter WHAT their LSAT was or what school they graduated from.

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?


btw - CUNY is a public interest law school, and jobs in that field generally pay pretty shitty, especially in the beginning. 7% of the class making $57k just out of school is actually quite good.

The above is horrible advice. The majority of posters are telling OP to retake (even if it means waiting another year) because the combination of debt with the poor job prospects make this to be what seems to be a bad financial decision. I taught the LSAT before law school, and most people I taught were capable of scoring much higher than a 148--this isn't meant to insult OP; rather, it's meant to encourage him to not sell himself short.

Like it or not, the LSAT plays a crucial role in law school admissions. Also, like it or not, where one goes to law school can have a major effect on that person's job prospects. Fortunately, the LSAT is a very, very learnable test and major increases are possible. The combination of these three things is why TLS is constantly telling people to retake. For most people, it really is very good advice.

[dirtrida2]

Once a CUNY graduate passes the bar, they are a lawyer just the same as a Harvard graduate.

If you're graduating from one of the top 20ish schools in the country, sure, you're going to be in a better position to get a job. For the rest of us, it's going to be about connections, luck, and what we've done with our time in school. Additionally, there are a LOT of people who don't go into private practice out of law school. There are marketing jobs for fashion brands in NYC who are looking for someone who has a law degree (why, who the hell knows) - but my point is, no one should be putting someone down or advising them against law school because of their LSAT or school choice. There are a LOT of things you can do with a law degree, and regardless, it is commendable that someone is willing to put in the work to pursue it - no matter WHAT their LSAT was or what school they graduated from.

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?

btw - CUNY is a public interest law school, and jobs in that field generally pay pretty shitty, especially in the beginning. 7% of the class making $57k just out of school is actually quite good.

No one is saying he is not "smart", what they are hinting at is the fact the he only took the LSAT once (I'm pretty sure) and that he has NO good reason not to sit out a year. If you are going to be lazy about your LSAT prep, do you think your mentality will change when you get into law school?

I took the LSAT 3 times and fell far short of my goals. Twice I was in the 150 range and thought hard about applying, but decided to retake and finally broke into the 160's. While I still wish I scored higher, I am glad I took the time off to retake. At least now I will be looking at a full ride, or close to it, from schools I had a slim chance of getting into.

I faced a lot of criticism when I first posted threads about applying to schools with a score in the 150's. Sure it was depressing, but damn am I glad they grilled me to retake. Heck, if I don't get the type of acceptances/money I want, you bet I will consider retaking in June for one last shot. (Yes I am eligible for one).

[timbs4339]

Once a CUNY graduate passes the bar, they are a lawyer just the same as a Harvard graduate.

If you're graduating from one of the top 20ish schools in the country, sure, you're going to be in a better position to get a job. For the rest of us, it's going to be about connections, luck, and what we've done with our time in school. Additionally, there are a LOT of people who don't go into private practice out of law school. There are marketing jobs for fashion brands in NYC who are looking for someone who has a law degree (why, who the hell knows) - but my point is, no one should be putting someone down or advising them against law school because of their LSAT or school choice. There are a LOT of things you can do with a law degree, and regardless, it is commendable that someone is willing to put in the work to pursue it - no matter WHAT their LSAT was or what school they graduated from.

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?


btw - CUNY is a public interest law school, and jobs in that field generally pay pretty shitty, especially in the beginning. 7% of the class making $57k just out of school is actually quite good.

No. A CUNY grad who passes the bar and cannot get a lawyer job is not the same as a Harvard grad who is working at Skadden, or for the DOJ, or the ACLU. The reason people are so rude is because of people like you, the gun to my head crowd who don't want to retake the LSAT and just have to go to law school, right now, no matter how bad an investment. When that is your reasoning, then yes, you are dumb. If the higher Ed bubble has taught us anything, its that education =/= intelligence.

Most people here will be the first to admit that the admissions system is broken.Guess what, so's the legal hiring market. But that's no reason to take on a shitload of debt to play another rigged, broken game where you know the odds are aginst you, because this is America dammit and you think its your right to make shitty investments and have nobody call you on it. Well its not, and when you advise some kid to go take on debt in the face of objectively poor odds, it is much worse than telling someone they can do better on the LSAT.

[NinerFan]

There are marketing jobs for fashion brands in NYC who are looking for someone who has a law degree (why, who the hell knows) - but my point is, no one should be putting someone down or advising them against law school because of their LSAT or school choice. There are a LOT of things you can do with a law degree, and regardless, it is commendable that someone is willing to put in the work to pursue it - no matter WHAT their LSAT was or what school they graduated from.

This reads like an admissions brochure. "Your JD will be VERSATILE." Yeah, you can use it as a wall decoration, as a large, unwieldy paperweight, for scratch paper, for kindling.... very versatile.

A lot of places are hiring JD's to do non-JD things are they? You say there are "a LOT of things" you can do with it. Okay. If there are so many things that can be done with a JD, please tell me some. You listed 1, very specific job. What else can I do with my JD that I was not previously qualified to do, other than be a lawyer or work in the legal field?

Apparently, for one, I can be a marketer for fashion brands. Ooooh. I have a sneaking suspicion that I might also be able to be one without a JD, and that, perhaps a different degree/experience would actually make me a more attractive candidate for that job.

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do.

You are receiving advice and rejecting it. I question whether you are one of the more educated people in society, right now. The educated people in our age group would hear statistics and advice regarding The Value of Law School and make an informed, rational decision. You appear to be idealizing the legal profession and thinking that, by your hard work, you will somehow avoid the outcome suffered by a majority of people. It's possible. It's not likely.

It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response?

Heh, do you think lawyers are all nice and polite to one another all the time?

[dirtrida2]

[romothesavior]

Once a CUNY graduate passes the bar, they are a lawyer just the same as a Harvard graduate.

No, because just about every Harvard grad will have a legal job (and a high paying and/or interesting one at that), while only about 1/3 of CUNY grads get full-time permanent lawyer jobs at all. You don't go to law school just to pass the bar. You go to law school to practice law. CUNY does not put you in much of a position to do that.

Stop giving shit advice.

[romothesavior]

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?

And while I agree with you that the "Most people with a pulse..." comment was rude and uncalled for, I do think it is absurd that there are law schools that will accept people with 148 LSAT scores. The legal market simply cannot absorb this many law graduates, and it is irresponsible for both the schools to accept them and for the students to go. People with sub-median MCAT scores sure as hell aren't becoming doctors or being admitted into medical school; why are people with terrible LSAT scores accepted into law school, when in all likelihood they have little shot at a respectable job in the legal community?

The advice on this site can be a little jarring a times, but on the whole it is a good thing. I would not be where I am today if TLS had not shaken me and shown me how bad the legal market is. I'd rather people get the information and a bold wake up call now than coddle them, tell them everything will be alright and it's all about "morality and character" and "ambition" and "hard work" only to find you've wasted tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars and three years of your life pursuing an untenable dream.

I have enough unemployed and indebted friends at T20 schools with good grades, good personalities, and good work ethic to find your holier-than-thou lecturing nauseating.

[timbs4339]

Didn't we all graduate college and take the LSATs? Aren't we supposed to be some of the more educated people in society right now? People, like myself, come to these forums looking for advice or comfort or to make connections with people that share the same ambitions they do. It is really unfortunate that so many people are harshly critical and INSANELY rude to people. "Most people with a pulse can do better than a 148"? Can anyone think of a more inappropriate, pretentious, deplorable thing to say to someone who has been polite and done nothing to warrant such a response? Or, better question: are we back in the 6th grade? Seriously, law schools have their admissions process all wrong. Who cares about a damn LSAT or GPA when this is the level of morality and character that is representing your school?

And while I agree with you that the "Most people with a pulse..." comment was rude and uncalled for, I do think it is absurd that there are law schools that will accept people with 148 LSAT scores. The legal market simply cannot absorb this many law graduates, and it is irresponsible for both the schools to accept them and for the students to go. People with sub-median MCAT scores sure as hell aren't becoming doctors or being admitted into medical school; why are people with terrible LSAT scores accepted into law school, when in all likelihood they have little shot at a respectable job in the legal community?

das' racist and classist. Expecting poor kids to shell out 200K for a legal education of questionable value, however, is not classist at all, and will never have disproportionate effects on students of color who don't have a lot of accumulated family wealth to engage in conspicuous consumption.

[LionelHutzJD]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

[somewhatwayward]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

The issue is not whether the 165 is smarter than the 148. The issue is that someone with a 165 has a shot (although not a great one unless URM) at a school worth going to while a 148 has no shot at any school worth going to.

[andres]

most people with a pulse and some discipline can do better than a 148. if you cant, consider another profession

These are ignorant comments that neither help nor necessarily true. The average LSAT score is about 151 , therefore there are may people who score ~148. If you're not going to say anything useful, don't say anything at all.

Just apply and see what happens, if you get in, great. If you don't get in, re-take or consider another career. Best of luck!

[romothesavior]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

The issue is not whether the 165 is smarter than the 148. The issue is that someone with a 165 has a shot (although not a great one unless URM) at a school worth going to while a 148 has no shot at any school worth going to.

+1. OP, you may be as smart as the guy with the 170 for all I know, I'm not here to impugn your intelligence (though I will say you completely missed the point if that's what you think most people ITT are doing). But the guy with the 170 is likely to get a job as a lawyer, whereas you are not likely to get a job as a lawyer if you go to a school like CUNY. That's our point. Did you look at the link with CUNYs job placement statistics? What are your thoughts on that?

And Andres, the fact that there are schools that accept 148s, or that a lot of people get 148s, does not make a 148 a good LSAT score. This isn't about the elitism or anything of that sort. Its about jobs. No school that accepts 148 LSAT scores is worth the investment of time and money. Even if OP gets in, he still should not go. This isn't medical school where almost everyone get a job.

[LionelHutzJD]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

The issue is not whether the 165 is smarter than the 148. The issue is that someone with a 165 has a shot (although not a great one unless URM) at a school worth going to while a 148 has no shot at any school worth going to.

+1. OP, you may be as smart as the guy with the 170 for all I know, I'm not here to impugn your intelligence (though I will say you completely missed the point if that's what you think most people ITT are doing). But the guy with the 170 is likely to get a job as a lawyer, whereas you are not likely to get a job as a lawyer if you go to a school like CUNY. That's our point. Did you look at the link with CUNYs job placement statistics? What are your thoughts on that?

And Andres, the fact that there are schools that accept 148s, or that a lot of people get 148s, does not make a 148 a good LSAT score. This isn't about the elitism or anything of that sort. Its about jobs. No school that accepts 148 LSAT scores is worth the investment of time and money. Even if OP gets in, he still should not go. This isn't medical school where almost everyone get a job.

Yes i understand the shitty job prospects from this school. Are you from NYC by any chance? CUNY is well respected around here, especially their professors. Not everyone going to law school is going to make 300k right off the bat you know.

[LionelHutzJD]

But i digress. I know your points and I listen to them. CUNY is not my top choice but were I to get in, I would consider it.

[romothesavior]

Im not just referring to six figure jobs, that's the thing. Only 36% of graduates land full time permanent legal jobs of any kind. A big majority of the class never works as a lawyer, or has to resort to temp jobs and part time jobs. Your odds of being a "real lawyer" from CUNY are sub-50%, that's what I (we) have been trying to tell you. For details see Law School Transparency for details.

Out of curiosity, how many times did you take the LSAT and what was your prep regimen?

[star fox]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

I agree with you that the LSAT doesn't test anything except how to take the LSAT. It doesn't measure intelligence or how good of a law student or a lawyer someone will be...

That being said, the LSAT is extremely important for determining where you get accepted into Law School. And what law school you go to is extremely important for determining if you get a legal job after employment. Over half of CUNY graduates are unemployed or in short-term part time gigs. Only a third have longterm employment that requires a JD (i.e. a lawyer job).

If you're ok with those prospects then best of luck to you. However, what reason do you have for not wanting to wait a year. You definitely can master the LSAT and raise that score up. Why short change yourself?

[rvadog]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments.

I'm not sure you know what a standardized test is.

[uvabro]

At the extremes the LSAT does test who will do well in law school. I'm sorry but if you can't break down the logic of a 3 sentence argument there's no way you'll break down the logic of a 10 page old archaic British case well enough to recognize and use it on an exam fact pattern. I agree the 180 vs a 160 will be more about test taking strategy than aptitude but the 148 lacks the baseline aptitude to succeed or even place anywhere outside of the bottom 10 percent. It can be learned but if one is too lazy to acquire these skills before law school why would they acquire it with deadlines in law school? I'd like to hear anecdotal evidence of a sub-150 being top 10 percent even at a 4th tier, and you'll need that to get a job. It's not entirely random. The extremes are predictable. A 180 will not be at the bottom of CUNY and a 148 will not be at the top.

[dirtrida2]

DONT BE LAZY - What is the rush? Do you have to matriculate this year? What is your reasoning?

The LSAT is not an easy test and studying for it sucks, but if you aren't willing to put in the time - good luck in law school.

[LionelHutzJD]

Oh please I can dissect an argument very well. Just doing 27 of them in 35 minutes isnt exactly indicative of real life.

[timbs4339]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments. The difference in mental aptitude im sure is not that great between a 148 taker and a 165 taker. What? 15 more questions correct? Who cares.

The issue is not whether the 165 is smarter than the 148. The issue is that someone with a 165 has a shot (although not a great one unless URM) at a school worth going to while a 148 has no shot at any school worth going to.

+1. OP, you may be as smart as the guy with the 170 for all I know, I'm not here to impugn your intelligence (though I will say you completely missed the point if that's what you think most people ITT are doing). But the guy with the 170 is likely to get a job as a lawyer, whereas you are not likely to get a job as a lawyer if you go to a school like CUNY. That's our point. Did you look at the link with CUNYs job placement statistics? What are your thoughts on that?

And Andres, the fact that there are schools that accept 148s, or that a lot of people get 148s, does not make a 148 a good LSAT score. This isn't about the elitism or anything of that sort. Its about jobs. No school that accepts 148 LSAT scores is worth the investment of time and money. Even if OP gets in, he still should not go. This isn't medical school where almost everyone get a job.

Yes i understand the shitty job prospects from this school. Are you from NYC by any chance? CUNY is well respected around here, especially their professors. Not everyone going to law school is going to make 300k right off the bat you know.

Kid, you have a lot to learn about law school. Of course the professors are well-respected- they all graduated from T10 schools and clerked for federal court of appeals judges. It's totally separate and irrelevant from whether the school is a good investment.

If employers respected the graduates they'd be hiring them in the same numbers as they hire CLS or NYU grads. That's just common sense.

[nickb285]

.

[dirtrida2]

DONT BE LAZY - What is the rush? Do you have to matriculate this year? What is your reasoning?

Confirmation bias?

Whatever works, I would just like to see him take another shot at the LSAT.

I was in his shoes once and I am glad TLS gave me that tough-love.

[cinephile]

Im sorry but the LSAT is not a standardized test. Some may just struggle with testing environments.

I'm not sure you know what a standardized test is.

Seriously.