I'm starting in the fall at a tier 4 school, and I have found some of the comments in this thread surprising. I was accepted to "better" schools (even a tier 1), but decided that this tier 4 school will be the best fit for me for a variety of reasons. I do not intend on transferring, and kind of resent that so many people attending tier 4s are so incredibly quick to point out that they are going to end up transferring. Can't anybody just be happy, even for a second? I really don't see what the big deal is. Tier 2-4 schools are all regional schools for the most part, so I strongly doubt that it really makes a huge difference between a tier 2 and a tier 4. It reminds me so much of stupid girls (and guys, too) who get so label obsessed that they can't be seen in public without their fill-in-the-blank purse (or whatever). Rankings are just labels, and it's pathetic to get so caught up in it and make major life decisions based on a silly magazine (and the people who subscribe to it). Just do what makes you happy.
I don't know about that. There are a lot more Brooklyn grads (Tier 2) with good NYC jobs than grads of NYLS, Hofstra, or Pace.I would say in big cities, you are correct, and your point is well taken. I was thinking more of schools in the middle of the county (Chicago excluded), where the school is one of 1 or 2 school in the general area. Lets take Kentucky for example. There's UK in Lexington, U of Louisville in Lousiville (duh), and Northern Kentucky (one of the schools mentioned in the "law schools to avoid" orginal post)(NKU is just outside of Cincinnati, BTW). If you look at it from a regional perspective, I'd say that none of these schools really place that much better than the next. Really, law firms surrounding schools like these tend to gravitate toward schools in their particular region, despite the fact that these schools are ranked differently (tier 1, tier 2, and tier 4). Anyway, my point is that you're probably right when talking about schools that are in big cities (and are in high competition with other school), but I'd be inclined to say that for the rest of us (the majority), schools tend to be regional feeders. If you want to practice in Akron, Ohio for example, you should go to U of Akron (a tier 3) over, say, U of Brooklyn (a tier 2), and so on and so forth. This is, of course, assuming that your Career Services is worth a damn (which I think is more important than the rankings).Furthermore, if you aren't interested in BigLaw (I'm not), I really don't think rankings matter very much at all. I think that it is more important to go to a school where you want to practice, and do well. In a lot of cases, firms, organiztions, and businesses develop strong ties to their local school, and would rather hire a local student (assuming they did well in law school), than similarly qualified student from a better school. Of course, there are always exceptions. I am just speaking generally.Hopefully, that makes sense.
Page created in 0.937 seconds with 18 queries.