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 - proletariat
« on: January 24, 2007, 08:30:47 AM »
The final nails are being driven into the coffin of my law school career. I emailed all my professors to double-confirm that my grades were accurate (no need to base a major life decision on bad data), and to thank them for their instruction. Unless the school administration comes back with a carrot like discounted tuition, I'll likely be off the books as of COB today. A discount is highly unlikely, but running the LS costs the same whether I'm there or not, so some tuition from me is better than nothing.
The decision came down to the fact that I account for 3/4 of our household income. We can't (or aren't willing to) afford dropping back to the likely salary of a top 35% - 40% graduate combined with substantial loan payments.
I would stay if my current career's salary outlook wasn't as good or if the school's reputation was better. The stars just aren't aligning on this one.
The best argument for staying in that showed up in this thread is the fact that my salary will grow substantially from whatever the starting salary is. This is probably true, but not quite certain enough to make the risk worth it.
Another good argument was that certain firms look for engineering grads, any engineering grads. This is an encouraging anecdote, but at the end of the day I can't hang my hat on it.
Thanks for all your collective input.
« on: January 23, 2007, 02:51:17 PM »
Do you not have a scholarship at your T4 with a 160 average LSAT? Why are you having to take out loans?
They are the only evening division in town, i.e. they don't have to give away scholarships. I did get an, albeit small, scholarship to the other local daytime 3rd tier law school, but have to keep my day job.
Meh. Believe it or don't. I'm not looking for sympathy. I guess I was looking for some compelling reason not to quit, but haven't heard one yet.
« on: January 23, 2007, 11:11:51 AM »
Median starting salary at my school is around 45k. Let's say I luck out and make 55k. In 3.5 years I expect to be making around 66k at my current job. That's a 11k pay cut from day one, plus the 12k virtual pay cut from loans. Starting out with a 23k pay cut 3.5 years from now, when I'm in my thirties, paying a mortgage, and buying shoes for my kid(s) doesn't seem like the most fiscally responsible course of action. This is the only reason I plan to quit. If money was no object, I would love to stay in school, but I can't afford to chase an ideal.
« on: January 23, 2007, 10:29:10 AM »
BTW, 35% is not bad and with an engineering degree you could be 50% and people would still be clammoring for you after school.
If you're talking patent law, those firms simply aren't interested in Civil Engineers.
« on: January 23, 2007, 10:26:01 AM »
It's for real. Search my username and you'll see I haven't made BS posts in the past. I'm interested in comments about my situation is the reason I posted.
« on: January 23, 2007, 09:44:02 AM »
I finally got my grades back, and they seem to land me around the 35th percentile of a 4th tier. I made the decision a while ago that I would quit if not in the top 20% because the chances of advancing my finances (over and above my current career) would be slim. My entrance statistics of having a 161 and 158 on the LSAT and a 3.0 in an engineering undergrad curriculum boosted my confidence that I would do well. It seems, however, that my talents don't include taking timed essay tests.
I did best (B+) in legal writing which is graded on multiple choice tests and long-term written assignments. I did worst in CivPro (C+), in which the professor writes analytically easy exams, but obsesses over how accurately you state obvious facts. Got a B in Contracts and a B- in Torts. I felt I knew all the material very
well. At the end of the day, it's what you get on the paper that counts.
I'm a part time student with an established career, so this definitely isn't the end of the world, but it's a little depressing none the less. The worst part is that my plan for the next 3.5 years vaporized, and I have to figure out what to do next.
I'm thinking an executive MBA program is in my future.
« on: January 12, 2007, 08:29:04 AM »
I think that good grades would hurt motivation more than bad grades. I would be like, "Oh, I worked way too hard if these are my grades. I'll have to do less this semester." I bring the slackness.
« on: January 09, 2007, 07:46:06 AM »
My school doesn't. Grrr. So, if I want to predicate my attendance on my performance first semester, I have to drop all classes, take a year-long leave of absence, and restart in Spring 08. I'm curious how common this is throughout all the law schools.
How about indicating what tier or school you go to after voting.
« on: January 03, 2007, 07:54:09 AM »
I plan to check the online schedule Sunday night to see when and where my classes are on Monday.
« on: December 12, 2006, 10:54:40 AM »
Most exam questions are looking for the same thing, regardless of how they phrase it though - they want the relevant issues between the two parties.
This is why I'm not too concerned. I addressed the relevant issues, but didn't necessarily phrase them to directly answer the question.
Just personally, I like to do the argument - counter - counter-counter, etc. format. It seems to flow easier for me to write it (follow a single trail to its end, then begin again) and I think it reads easier as well.
I do the same thing. The only problem with that method is when pressed for time, you may never get some really important issue like promissory estoppel or statute of frauds that usually comes at the end. In the calculus of grading LS exams, counter arguments probably don't count as much as hitting on every issue. But only the professor knows for sure.