Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
 on: September 15, 2015, 04:27:31 PM 
Started by Citylaw - Last post by Citylaw
Well I think your whole premise that schools are becoming lies picky is resulting in lower bar passage rate.

Essentially the applicants that normally would be getting into Hastings, but rejected from Boalt or Stanford are now able to get into Boalt and Stanford. The applicants that normally would get into USF or Golden Gate can now get into Hastings and USF and Golden Gate are left admitting people on the cusp that may not all be ABA school ready, which results in lower scores. Plenty of people will pass from every school, but the talent pool is reduced resulting in lower scores thereby resulting in the publication of the initial article.

It is actually probably just back to normal. I think in 2008, 2009, 2010 it was the opposite effect people that should have been getting into Boalt or Stanford had to settle for Hastings, people that should have been accepted to Hastings had to settle for USF and Golden Gate and none of the fringe candidates were admitted resulting in high passage rates during that time.  Then all these people complained about the lack of jobs etc, resulting in a dip in applications and the scenario above.

There will soon not be enough lawyers and law school will become more attractive again, but then the same thing will happen.

It is just capitalism at its finest.

 on: September 15, 2015, 03:31:30 PM 
Started by Citylaw - Last post by seanwheart
Drop in applications to law school will NOT result in fewer lawyers.

It works like this. Most law schools can economically support a certain number of people in each entering class - thirty seats, forty seats, etc. They can easily fill those seats even if they get, say only 400 applications instead of the usual 500. They just have to be less picky about who they accept, that's all. But they can still fill all those seats.  So they will still be graduating the same numbers of law students.

Also, as more new law schools open up, there will be even more people graduating with law degrees. There are several new law schools that opened up recently just in my own state. Law schools are very profitable for universities, and its often a very attractive proposition to purchase a law school.

The only thing that would result in fewer lawyers would be if many law schools started closing down - but that's not going to happen any time soon.

 on: September 14, 2015, 12:26:12 PM 
Started by barprephero - Last post by Citylaw
I think there are solid posts above and there is no real reason to go, but as a few posters said if you think you want a J.D. to practice law on the side it usually doesn't work out well. It is not really a part-time profession.

I think most potential 0L's are best suited to work in a law office for a year or so prior to applying to law school. There are parts of the legal profession that are awesome and others that suck. On Friday I was arguing a big hearing, which was fun to watch today and tomorrow I am going to be looking through boxes of documents to draft discovery responses, which is miserable.

So like every other job out there it is not constantly awesome, but if someone knows of a job that is 100% amazing all the time please let me know.

I think one of the best reasons to apply to law school is that as a lawyer you do have the power to change things and you are either licensed to practice law or your not. If you have a license to practice law you can represent a client and make a difference in someones life.  No other profession allows you to fight for or against the right to gay marriage in court, or sue the police for brutality, or defend police officers from frivolous lawsuits on and on. I think the judicial branch is the part of the political system that really matters and you can only be a part of it with a license to practice law.

As to the "rich" part plenty of lawyers do well, but it is rarely monetary success out of the gate. Furthermore, many of the lucrative positions require you to do some unpleasant things. I.E. if your bank attorney you have to force someone of their home, or if a corporation spills oil and kills some people you don't need to minimize the value of the deceased lives, etc everybody deserves a defense and there is nothing wrong with that, but there are real people involved in litigation and what the lawyers do or don't do makes a huge impact on people's lives.

 on: September 14, 2015, 12:14:51 PM 
Started by rose9729 - Last post by Citylaw
Well it sounds like you have done everything you can. The vast majority of people do not get 150 on the LSAT yet alone 160 and a very, very small minority get 170 or above.  If you get a 162 that is a very solid score and you can be admitted to a number of ABA law schools with substantial scholarship money.

I think for most 0L's like yourself the LSAT is the first reality check. You were probably a great high school student, clearly a great college student with a 3.95, but now you are going to the big leagues, which is law school. Everyone is striving to get a 170 and was a great high school and college student and no matter what law school you attend everyone is going to be smart, hard-working and motivated and there is a 50% chance you will finish in the bottom half of the class, this is nothing against you personally just the reality. There is a 10% chance you will finish in the top 10%, but 100% of Ol's come into law school certain they will be in the top 10%, but 90% are wrong.

I hope you get a 170, but all you can do is take the test. I don't know how many people put it off for years hoping to get a better score, but it sounds like you have done everything you can. Keep studying and get a real score maybe you will get a 180, maybe you will get a 148 I don't know nor does anyone else. Once you have a real score you will know your options, but until you have a real score it is all speculation. If you really think you bomb it you can retake, but if I was you I would take this October LSAT and start applying to schools.

If you really want to try and improve the October LSAT you can take the February one and see if you improve there is no harm, but just take it.

Good luck.

 on: September 14, 2015, 12:30:21 AM 
Started by rose9729 - Last post by Maintain FL 350
Without knowing you and your personal abilities, it's pretty much impossible for anyone here to determine whether or not you are capable of getting a 170. Because I don't know you, my comments are going to be fairly general. That said, keep this in mind:

We all have some inherent limitations. For example, no matter how hard I study I will always suck at math. Can I get better at math, and improve my mathematical abilities? Yes, but I'll probably never be in the top 5% of mathematicians no matter what.

When you talk about scoring 170, you're talking about scoring in the top 5%. In order to do better than 95% of the other people you've probably got to have a combination of inherent skills and effective studying. I mean, if all it took to score 170 was tons and tons of studying then lots of people would be scoring 170.

You probably can still raise your score, but by how much? I don't know. A score of 162-ish is good. It means you did better than something like 80% of the people who took the LSAT. I think most people do plateau at some point and are often disappointed with their scores. It's sort of an ego check.

Don't get fixated on a particular score. Focus on understanding the test as best as you possibly can, continue to study effectively, and you will probably get the highest score that you are capable of getting. 

 on: September 13, 2015, 10:11:20 PM 
Started by rose9729 - Last post by rose9729
I am aiming for a 170 on the October LSAT, but for at least the past month, my score has consistently been 161-163, despite taking the time to go over answers I was unsure about and/or got incorrect and practicing those types of questions.

I have been self-studying for the LSAT since May, I had a tutor work intensively with me on logic games from May-July, and I have been in a TestMasters class since July. I only use the official PrepTests and books with official questions (PowerScore bibles, The LSAT Trainer). I have taken about 10 practice tests in total under timed, realistic conditions.

It seems on every practice exam I either have a major problem with RC (-7) and one of the logic games (while getting 100% on the other 3 games) but only get 4 wrong per LR section or the RC and logic games sections are fine (-2 or -3 each) but then I get about 9 wrong per LR section. Basically, I either have a problem with one half of the exam or the other. Recently, I did one practice exam where I gave myself 10 minute breaks in between sections and got a 172. I know this doesn't mean much, but it does show that I do have the necessary skills and strategies.

This is very frustrating, especially since in my practice I feel confident about the questions I am working on. I study about 3 hours per day, sometimes more, and based on the above, feel my studying is of good quality. I have a 3.95 GPA from a top 15 undergrad and don't see why for the amount and quality of studying I have done I shouldn't be able to get a 170.

Any advice for how to overcome this? Is it even realistic to expect this big of a jump in my score with only 3 weeks left? I know the obvious answer would be to just keep in mind retaking the exam in December, but I really don't want to resort to that if I don't absolutely have to.

 on: September 13, 2015, 05:52:27 PM 
Started by calvinexpress - Last post by i VIII 🐍 π
You say that you have "committed to" it and plan to "follow through" but how? Which progam EXACTLY do you plan to go to? Because I don't recall you committing to anything but a general idea of "something" yet.

 on: September 13, 2015, 03:18:18 PM 
Started by barprephero - Last post by seanwheart
My young relative is one example of someone with unrealistic goals regarding law school. He says he will be rich and never have to worry about money if he gets a law degree.

When I try to get him to focus on reality, he just keeps talking about stuff he's read in novels about lawyers. And keeps talking about how lawyers are "rich". Of course, it doesn't help that he actually does know an attorney who is quite well off. But I've tried to explain to him that rich attorneys are not the norm, and he doesn't believe it.  Also, he isn't Ivy League material and won't be going to a top law school, so once he graduates from law school, he will be just another mediocre attorney, from a mediocre school, pounding the pavement desperately searching for work.

 on: September 13, 2015, 02:17:16 PM 
Started by barprephero - Last post by Maintain FL 350
Hi Maintain.

Would you say that, generally speaking, a statistically significant percentage of 0Ls matriculate admitting to an improper or unreasonable purpose in mind?

Trying to think of some examples.

I'm not sure I totally understand the question, but I think a lot of 0Ls simply don't know (1) what lawyers actually do, (2) what law school is actually like, and (3) how to distinguish between realistic and unrealistic goals.

For example, I've met a lot of 0Ls who say "I think I'd be great in law school because I really enjoy arguing." They think it's going to be a three year long version of their high school debate team. They don't understand the academic nature of a JD program.

I've also met 0Ls who have said things like "I'm going to get a joint JD/MBA because I really like business, and that way I can work in business and practice law on the side." Again, they just have no clue that establishing a practice, obtaining clients, and practicing law is something you can't do in your spare time. Or, they say things like "I'd like to work in human rights law at the U.N. or something", not understanding that those jobs don't typically go to 25 year olds fresh out of law school.

So, what I'm getting at is that there are a lot of 0Ls who see a law degree as a vaguely useful stepping stone to some kind of career, but who have not spent any time researching whether or not their notions are correct. Conversely, I don't think I've ever met a 0L who said "I'd like to work at a small firm drafting wills, defending DUIs and arranging child custody modifications", which is where most of them will end up. 

 on: September 13, 2015, 12:21:18 PM 
Started by calvinexpress - Last post by Redheaded Wanderer
Thanks for weighing in, and providing more accurate information so that others will understand law school - even part time - isn't a 1 day a week thing. Yes, I have researched the part time schools within a 5-hour radius, and yes, they require classes 4 evenings a week. That would require that I at a minimum get a little apartment and live away from my family during tthe weeks (and give part of the weekend to commuting home). That's not feasible. I have, however, committed to this journey and will proceed. I agree, we all make the choices we need to within our own contexts. Frankly, I wouldn't have chosen to go to law school at 22 - and at the end of my Ph.D. (which I earned at 26) I was DONE with school. Three more years at that point would have been a disaster, and I didn't need or want a law degree then. Funny how life ebbs and shifts. What will law schools do with millenials who have multiple careers in a lifetime? Is law (or maybe medicine too) the last of the dinosaur professions where the majority enter as young people and stay until they retire? I doubt it, and I sincerely hope that law wakes up and recognizes that reality is changing. I wonder if there are stats...

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10