Pretty much. The burden is strongly on the applicant to justify going, usually in light of fairly overwhelming evidence to the contrary. This is mostly speaking from a financial perspective of course, but that's why it's clearer cut in law -- most people go for financial reasons -- either to improve their earning power or embark on a stable and well-paid career. It's not like you're talking to liberal-arts grad students in terms of their primary motivations. What many didn't realize for the longest time was that a legal education can be just as dicey of a financial proposition (if not dicier since legal educations are usually costlier).
Law Schools Applications Fall as Costs Rise and Jobs Are Cut.
- Thread starter Lonely1
- Start date
- Status
Pretty much. The burden is strongly on the applicant to justify going, usually in light of fairly overwhelming evidence to the contrary. This is mostly speaking from a financial perspective of course, but that's why it's clearer cut in law -- most people go for financial reasons -- either to improve their earning power or embark on a stable and well-paid career. It's not like you're talking to liberal-arts grad students in terms of their primary motivations. What many didn't realize for the longest time was that a legal education can be just as dicey of a financial proposition (if not dicier since legal educations are usually costlier).
Bboy AJ
My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
Naw, who gives a shit. Most people get hit with a hard smack of reality soon enough.
I think the only difference after law school is that I used to think being a lawyer was impressive and difficult to accomplish. Now I realize all you need is knowing how to fill out a FAFSA.
Pretty much this. Unless you're enormously overqualified for the school you attend, attempting to predict where you'll land is akin to playing roulette and hoping "18" hits.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Sure, top 10% is not a lock for anything. But then nothing is technically a lock. There are a lot of variables and intangibles at play as well.
As to top 10% being a total crapshoot, or class rankings in general being a crapshoot, that I don't understand. To some extent, you're right, but I think the cream generally rises to the top.
Lamel
Banned
I literally read an article yesterday that stated that the amount of US med school grads will surpass residency positions by 2015. So the prospects for IMGs will dwindle. This will force US med school grads to go into PC. But thankfully, the residency system is still much better than law prospects.
WonkyPanda
Member
I think that's a bit of a stretch. For example, i'd be hard-pressed to think that a top-of-class grad from Southwestern could compete with a top 1/3 grad from UCLA. I just don't see it.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
FYI, if you're enormously overqualified for the school you attend, it probably means you're going there on a full scholarship. Little or no debt at graduation plus a strong chance at being near the top of the class is a good thing. This is why it is important to not get so bogged down with law school rankings.
With regard to a top-of-class grad, I think you're totally wrong. Having the 1/XXX on the resume is going to be an enormous advantage. It also likely means other prestigious opportunities at law school, such as an editor of the law review.
But obviously there's some sort of general weighing scale that determines how highly qualified an applicant is. I'm not sure what it is exactly, but I think too many people overvalue law school rankings.
Funny, my older sister started at Southwestern, kicked ass, then transferred to UCLA and kicked ass there, too.
WonkyPanda
Member
Regional power can also be a big indicator of that, by the way. I'm not discrediting what you're saying, but if you're in a region with a lot of powerhouse schools, being a top 10 at a ~T30 school can become a crapshoot. Regardless, awesome job on rocking it.
Right. Excellent move. I guarantee she got way more looks because of the fact that she was at UCLA and not SW. I'm not saying the students can't compete on an intellectual level, but it's hard to compete from a prestige level.
In reality, what it means is you're likely transferring after 1L into a higher-ranked school.
There is no "strong chance of finishing at the top" You can't predict your rank. One mediocre grade, and your fucked. Thats it. Curves bro
WonkyPanda
Member
Agree completely. If you're pulling Top 1-5 at your law school and don't try to transfer into a higher ranked school, then I may question your judgment. Now, granted, if you're at NYU and don't try to transfer into Harvard, whatever. But, if you're at a place, like Hastings, and don't try to transfer to Stanford, then I think you're nuts.
I'm going to graduate without debt anyway so that's not a particular concern. I'm also planning on going into business so there is that market as well.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
So one mediocre grade sends you from the top half of the class to the bottom? Or from the top third to the middle third? That's just not true. You can generally figure out where you fit in within those parameters.
I should add I say nothing here as a proponent of the system. I think the rigid prestige-oriented perspective of the legal profession is dreadful, elitist, pretentious, and plenty more. I think the views from law school X to any school beneath X are colored by a paternalistic condescension.
I'm merely acknowledging reality, even if I dislike it immensely.
I'm merely acknowledging reality, even if I dislike it immensely.
It can put you out of the top 10, and then what if youre at a school with bad placement numbers?
I see. I agree then.
Bboy AJ
My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
j_k_redtail
Member
Gotta tell you man, I am absolutely amazed that this hasn't dissuaded you at all.
- Status