This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Maintain FL 350
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32  34 35 36 37 38 ... 69
« on: February 07, 2013, 12:11:59 AM »
I don't know if you're GPA kills your chances, per se, but it definitely reduces your chances. I know someone who was accepted into LEOP with a 3.5/160. For Hastings the 160 was relatively low, and they had a very impressive public interest background.
Your LSAT is good, but still only average for Hastings. Your GPA, however, is below their 25%. Working for well-known firm is good, but those kinds of soft factors won't usually make up for lower numbers. Those attributes usually only matter in tie-breaker situations. Although law schools love to say that they look at the whole package, admission is primarily based on the numbers.
You might want to take a look at USF, Santa Clara, maybe GGU. You'd almost certainly get into at least two, and might even get some scholarship offers from GGU. I used to live in SF and I understand the attraction of Hastings, but you've got an uphill battle.
« on: February 06, 2013, 12:47:12 PM »
Attending schools of this caliber is fine, but really consider where you'd be most happy living and working. At smaller local schools such as these your best opportunities for post-grad employment will be within the school's immediate region. If you go to school in Idaho, for example, and then decide that Florida would be a nicer place to live, it's going to be tough to move.
I completely understand the financial concerns you have, and it's good that you're paying attention to debt (many people don't). Livinglegend has already said this, but it's important enough to repeat: choose a place where you wouldn't mind living longterm. It makes a huge difference in your overall wellbeing if you truly like your city and school. If you don't like either one, it's going to be a long three years. Good Luck!
« on: February 06, 2013, 12:35:49 PM »
but I personally think there is a lot more to life than potential job propsects, which is something I think many OL's don't consider until it is to late.
Well said, I agree. Admittedly, I'm biased in favor of California. If I had those kind of numbers I wouldn't spend three years slogging through the snow in Chicago or Boston. I'd soak up the sun in Palo Alto.
« on: February 06, 2013, 12:10:37 AM »
I agree that, as a general rule, it makes sense to go to law school in the state in which you intend to practice. That said, I think a Yale degree (or Harvard/Columbia/Stanford etc) is nationally portable. There is probably some advantage to a Stanford or Boalt degree in the Bay Area, just as there is probably some advantage to a Penn degree in the Philadelphia area. Nonetheless, all of those degrees are considered elite, and an applicant with such a J.D. will likely be able to find employment anywhere.
« on: February 05, 2013, 12:00:33 AM »
In California 60 units plus a J.D. is the minimal requirement. That could be accomplished in just five years, only one more than the English LL.B. The issue, of course, is that most ABA approved law schools won't take an applicant without a bachelor's (with a few notable exceptions). The applicants are usually limited to CBE or correspondance schools.
Nonetheless, if one took 60 unit local community college then obtained a CBE degree they could get it done quicker and cheaper. The option exists, I just don't think too many people are interested. They want the recognition of the approved degrees.
« on: February 03, 2013, 11:29:05 PM »
You'll get in just about everywhere, with scholarships at many. If you're AA, you have a decent shot at Harvard.
« on: January 28, 2013, 02:47:06 AM »
Much of this depends on your LSAT, and without a score everything is pure speculation. The LSAT can be a weird test, and it's very difficult to predict your score unless you've taken multiple practice exams. I don't think a 3.2 for one year is going to make too much difference, as long as your overall GPA/LSAT/class rank are high.
I will say this, however:
At elite institutions (which I assume you mean by "amazing") high numbers alone are often not enough. They have so many well qualified candidates to choose from that they seem to pay more attention to things like impressive work experience, social justice/non-profit experience, graduate work, the prestige of your undergrad institution, etc. I remember reading somewhere that the average age at Yale was something like 27, which means they're taking people with quite a bit of post-grad experience.
So, if you really want to shoot for the top, keep your grades up, score very high on the LSAT, and try to develop some other aspects of your application that will help you stand out among the sea of over-achievers.
Also remember that even if you don't score in the top 1%, there are still plenty of good law schools that can provide you with a solid education. Don't get too caught up in the rankings like so many others.
« on: January 23, 2013, 04:38:58 PM »
2.86 LSDAS GPA, 151 LSAT. URM
This is the part that actually matters, GPA/LSAT/URM. Take a look at LSAC's admission profiles to get an idea of your chances. If I had to guess, I'd say that you have at least a shot at all of the schools you listed, and at a few (like Cal Western) you have a very
good shot. Pepperdine, San Diego, and Santa Clara are probably reaches, but you never know. If you had either a higher GPA or LSAT to compensate, you'd be in a better position to predict. The fact that both are low is offset by your URM status, but it's hard to say how much.
One thing I'd focus on is location. I assume that you're in CA, since so many of the schools are CA schools. If you want to stay on CA, then you're probably better off going to a local school than someplace like Quinnipiac or Albany.
« on: January 23, 2013, 04:27:38 PM »
Law school isn't like undergrad in the sense that you won't really major in a particular field of law. At most law schools the total number of classes you'll be able to take in a specialty area is maybe three or four. It's typically very limited. Even at a school that boasts a particular concentration, you're still probably only going to get a few classes and maybe a clinic or internship.
I've never heard of a school that specializes in ag law, but Lewis & Clark, Vermont, Davis, Hastings, and Oregon all have better than average environmental offerings. Again though, be realistic about how little difference it makes when it comes to getting hired. I agree with Jack24 that specialty rankings are questionable, and I certainly wouldn't advise going massively into debt to attend a school based on a specialty ranking.
« on: January 23, 2013, 04:17:10 PM »
On tier 3/4 schools? I've gotten in a few with pretty decent scholarships and am waiting to hear back from quite a few schools (ranks mixed) still.
I pretty much have a job secured after law school but what are your thoughts, is it worth going to tier 4 with good scholarship?
My opinion is that all ABA accredited schools are basically decent quality. In fact, that's the entire point of ABA accreditation: to create a predictable set of standards and to assure the consumer that a particular law school has met those standards. In reality, the education you receive at a T3/T4 is pretty much identical to what you will receive at all but the most elite schools. (Places like Harvard tend to focus on philosophical and policy considerations, whereas everyone else focuses on a combination of black letter law and policy.) The students at T3/T4 schools will mostly be smart, ambitious people, and you'll work very hard to earn your J.D. Honestly, there's probably almost no difference between the average T3/T4 and the average T1/T2, academically speaking.
The real difference, of course, is in post-grad opportunities. This is where you need to consider your personal goals before making a decision. If you want to work in biglaw or a prestigious federal clerkship, then you need to get into a big name school. If you're fine with smaller firms, solo practice, or government, then a scholarship at a T3/T4 might be a better deal. It really depends.
Many people will tell you to just accept an offer from the highest ranked school you get into. That may or may not be a mistake, depending on your goals. For example, let's say you want to live in Los Angeles, and you're trying to decide between the University of Florida (T1) or a full scholarship at Southwestern (T3 or 4). Personally, I'd take the scholarship at SW in a heartbeat because although FL is a Tier 1 school, it's not so elite that the pedigree alone is going to land you a job in Los Angeles. You'd be at a disadvantage compared to local talent who have had the opportunity to make connections.
OTOH, as between a scholarship at Southwestern versus full tuition at Stanford, I'd take Stanford. The point is, it really depends on the specifics.
Also, many T3s and T4s actually have good local reputations, despite what outsiders may think. For example, you listed Willamette as one of the schools you've applied to. In Oregon/Washington/Idaho etc Willamette has a decent reputation and many local judges and lawyers are Willamette grads. Even though a firm in NYC or Chicago may not be interested in Willamette grads, that doesn't mean it's a bad choice for someone who wants to stay in the northwest.
Realistically, with a 2.86/151 you're going to be attending a T3/T4. Focus on the area you want to live in, and get the cheapest degree from a local school. I wouldn't sacrifice tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars in tuition to move up a few spots in rankings, since it likely won't matter much anyway.
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32  34 35 36 37 38 ... 69