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 - jack24
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11  13 14 15 16 17 ... 108
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:56:38 AM »
I'm tempted to call this thread a flame.
If your story is real, I don't see why you would throw good money (or debt) after bad.
If you were applying for a transfer, what would you argue to convince them your past performance is not an indication of your potential?
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:03:44 AM »
Bar rules? What are you talking about?
I think Mr. Cooley is referring to the ABA 20 hour work rule, which is the most blatantly abusive rule I've seen in my time.
I had to sign a form each semester promising I wouldn't work more than 20 hours a week. I asked my school what would happen if I didn't sign and they said I wouldn't be able to graduate. It only applied to students with 12 credits/semester or more.
« on: August 09, 2012, 12:24:03 PM »
I'm sorry to hear about your insurance problems. I always assumed that school insurance (via your Wife) was cheap even though it has a reputation for being crappy.
Your situation may qualify you for some special cash scholarships, depending on your school. Some schools also offer summer stipends of 5k-15k to do certain types of work.
The very very fortunate among us can still get a large firm clerkship and make 4000 or so during 1L summer and 6000 or so during 2L summer, but that is so very rare these days. (I'm a 2011 graduate, and of our Law Review editorial board, only about 1/3 had paid internships)
Your option is to get a job you can handle (I cleaned offices during 1L and made good money), max out grad plus loans, and take advantage of income based repayment.
« on: August 08, 2012, 10:55:58 AM »
I think RobWreck makes some valid points, but law school is very different for each individual. While I believe the 3 hours of prepwork for one hour of class may be necessary for some people, I don't think it is for the median law student. I had a couple little kids and a wife at home during law school. I was a top quarter graduate at a 50-100 school and I did law review and moot court.
During 1L, I worked hard and efficiently from 8 to 5pm, monday-friday, including class time. That went up for the last few weeks of the semester. I honestly think that was far too much time, and I believe I wasted a lot of time on stuff that didn't matter.
If you are creative, at least 50% of your commute can be used preparing for finals. You can try to get special permission to record your classes (this wouldn't help me much), you can get some study aids on CD, and you can read commercial outlines and outlines from upperclassmen out loud and record them. Some people have to read to learn though.
I honestly believe that if you are OK getting Bs in a full-time program, you only need to dedicate 15-20 hours a week to non-class time. You have to be consistent, and you have to take shortcuts.
For example, during 2L I had to dedicate a lot of time to law review and moot court and my kids. I made sure to get an outline for my class from a prior student and I took notes on that outline as I listened in class. I only read the case summaries and headnotes for the assigned reading, and my finals prep consisted of improving my outline and taking practice tests. This approach worked very well for me and my grades actually went up substantially. I found reading and analyzing cases to be a complete waste of time. However, some people can't deal with this approach. I knew one 40-year-old mother of four who simply had to read every line of every case and make all of her own outlines. She did well, but it took three times as long.
« on: August 07, 2012, 10:52:36 AM »
†Concord Law School’s programs are designed to prepare graduates to pursue employment in their field of study, or in related fields. However, Concord does not guarantee that graduates will be placed in any particular job, eligible for job advancement opportunities, or employed at all.
I give Concord points for being truthful.
I think that all schools say that nowdays to avoid being sued. Even the ones that claim near 100% placement still say it on their radio ads.
Law schools have Radio Ads? It makes me sad to think anyone chooses a lawyer based on radio ads, but choosing a law school based on a radio ad is ten times worse.
« on: August 07, 2012, 10:50:27 AM »
someone with j.d. but without ph.d, for chrissakes. no one dispute whether someone with ph.d properly called doctor.
in land of blind, one-eyed person do all work.
Law school professors who have JD's and no Ph.D don't call themselves doctor, but I never had a professor in another discipline who held a J.D..
I think I'll just have students call me by my first name or professor if they feel the need for formality.
« on: August 07, 2012, 10:48:28 AM »
All in all, from what I've learned from active attorney's in my area, is that where you went to school is far less important than if you're good at what you do.
That's true, but there are thousands of attorneys who went to good schools who are good at what they do. We live in a world of tiebreakers because we have two attorneys for every attorney job.
Non ABA schools are a very good option considering you can practice law almost anywhere so long as you pass the bar in California and practice for a few years before applying to take the bar in another state.
Almost anywhere? Care to list the states that do this? (I don't mean to be snarky, but it's not close to almost anywhere)
The ABA is nice but is very over rated. I think people are going to see a shift as the cost v. benefit of attending an ABA school is not what it once was when you compare dollars and cents.
Yes, the ABA is overrated, but non aba schools need a few different things. They need to get state bars on board, they need higher quality students, and they need employers to get on board. Really, once employers get on board, students and state bars will follow suit.
« on: August 06, 2012, 04:32:22 PM »
If OP has a decent legal mind as well as networking skill, then I'd say he should probably choose whichever one will lead to less debt.
Outside the top national and top regional schools, a large majority of law students will live and die by their persistence and ability to network.
I think it's wise, when making a decision on schools, to assume you are going to be the median student at each school. Contrasting the career prospects of the #1 student at GGU and #1 student at SFU will look very different than contrasting the median law student at each school.
« on: August 06, 2012, 04:24:57 PM »
Ajax27: I think you are mixing responsibilities.
OP should check the box, because they asked a question, and OP should answer it honestly. If they ask, "How did your minority status lead to different challenges than white people face" then OP should answer honestly as well.
It's not the applicants job to interpret all of the philosophies that go into the admissions decision. It's the applicants job to be honest and showcase themselves. If the law school wants to find out more information, they are welcome to ask for that.
« on: August 06, 2012, 04:18:12 PM »
The word on the internet is that addendum's are most effective to demonstrate a trend. So if your GPA has improved significantly over time, the addendum can be helpful. I spoke with an admissions officer who said that addendum and personal statements are generally used as tiebreakers. But since you are a splitter with a high LSAT score, the addendum may be helpful in demonstrating that your LSAT score is a better indication of the real you than the GPA. IN my experience that isn't generally true.
I've also heard that excuses don't work well. Demonstrate your perseverance through adversity by focusing on what you learned from the experience.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11  13 14 15 16 17 ... 108