TTT

[Peaches]

You notice the names of the schools that professors come from?  T14 schools disproportionately produce clerks and legal scholars, so the high-level theory classes are directly relevant to what many T14 students want.  But the high-level finance courses are DIRECTLY relevant to the practice of law.  What you don't seem to get is that T14 and T4 schools are producing students not just for different pay scales, but for completely different legal industries.    Sure, there's only one bar exam for both "industries" -- but that bar exam is mostly irrelevant for biglaw/boutiques and directly relevant for small-time lawyer/late night TV ad personal injury law.  We don't study it because we use most of it for one test, and then never again.

You also will likely never see Durden in the courtroom.  IF he chooses to practice litigation (only a part of the law --  we didn't all decide to go to law school after watching a few episodes of "The Practice") and IF the case reaches a courtroom without settlement or pretrial disposition, he likely won't be in your county district court shuffling traffic tickets.  IF you happen to show up in the same courtroom, just know that T14 students all have clinics, externships, legal writing classes, trial classes, mock trial, and moot court too.  So I have no idea why you think you'll be able to run circles around them in a courtroom.

Also, firms usually pay for that "few extra thousand dollars" in bar prep.

[brasky]

Yes, I must admit the whole, "I'll see you in court sucka!" is sort of ridiculous considering the majority of attorneys never see each other in court. 

[dewayne_wayne]

My points are valid.  You wouldn't want someone that scored in the 40th percentile on the MCAT and with a 2.5 operating on you would you?  Why would you want that same person handling a major legal issue in your life?

I don't think your point is valid.  I think that is a misplaced fear.  Here is why.  The same marketplace that determined that T4 woman ended up at T4 school and T1 man ended up at T1 school, will determine which attorneys work on complex legal matters.  Passage of the State Bar grants a presumption of competency, but the marketplace determines who works on what legal matters and what their work is worth.  T4 woman may beat out T1 man in the marketplace, but only if T4 woman is superior.

Also, although T4's seem to get a raw deal (unfulfilled expectations), the excess supply of "public" legal services drives down the cost to the public of those legal services (criminal, divorce, bankruptcy, etc.), which tends to make legal services more affordable for the people.  This is arguably a good thing, but to the detriment of the T4, struggling to repay school loans and afford cost of living.   

[Peaches]

It's also arguably a bad thing because the attorneys working criminal, divorce, bankruptcy, wills, and family law have a dramatic affect on the daily lives of people.  To some of them, that interaction with their attorney could be one of the biggest determining factors in the directions their lives go in.  I'm in favor of weeding out potential lawyers twice -- once with competitive law school admissions and once with the bar exam. 

It's harder to become a veterinarian than a lawyer in this country. 

[NYC2L]

There is a similar discussion going on at abovethelaw.com for all those who can't get enough of this one.

I think dewayne_wayne's last point is valid. In fact, I was thinking about this same thing last night. More law students = more affordable legal services. While I agree with this from an economic standpoint there is still the issue of the quality of legal services. If these attorneys are not competent (not saying that all T3 and T4 grads are not competent) then those people who need public legal services are not getting effective representation. In other words, they are f***ed.

On the other hand, if these attorneys were eliminated from the marketplace, then people who desperately need services of that sort would have absolutely no low-cost option. In other words, they will be doubly-f***ed.

As with most segments of our society, the poor get shafted. This is no different.

[1LMan]

There is a similar discussion going on at abovethelaw.com for all those who can't get enough of this one.

I think dewayne_wayne's last point is valid. In fact, I was thinking about this same thing last night. More law students = more affordable legal services. While I agree with this from an economic standpoint there is still the issue of the quality of legal services. If these attorneys are not competent (not saying that all T3 and T4 grads are not competent) then those people who need public legal services are not getting effective representation. In other words, they are f***ed.

On the other hand, if these attorneys were eliminated from the marketplace, then people who desperately need services of that sort would have absolutely no low-cost option. In other words, they will be doubly-f***ed.

As with most segments of our society, the poor get shafted. This is no different.

Yes, it is much better to have the "poor" get T4 graduates with only minimal competence representing them....

[blackpowerman]

2Lman- in the same vein that its "good" to give poor people T-4 grads, isn't that the same mentality when admitting subpar minorities, so minorities have counsel "they can relate to", despite their qualifications?

[1LMan]

I'm against AA but I don't think the two are the same.......

[PSUDSL08]

As someone who started out at a T4 school and transferred to a T2, I’ll throw in my $0.02. I’ll be directly or indirectly referring to some of your posts on here, since I’m too lazy to cut and paste.

To the people that have either bashed T3/T4 schools themselves or the perceived lack of opportunities from these schools, how many of you have (1) spent a post-undergrad year in the workforce at a “meaningful” job that doesn’t involve working as a paralegal at a law firm or telemarketing (2) don’t have a “foot in the door” with regards to family members in high-up corporate positions or who own their own business, etc (3) currently have friends who truly like or love their jobs and/or (4) have friends making $60K plus in their mid-to-late 20’s outside of major market cities? If your answer to the last two is “yes” then you either went to a top school or socialized with highly motivated people. If your answer to the first two is “yes,” then your perception of what jobs are desirable or dead-end are going to be vastly different from those who haven’t worked or don’t have valuable professional connections.

My friends who obtained business degrees (undergrad had a top-20 business school) with 3.0+ GPA’s are less than thrilled with what they do. They’ve topped out at around the $50K mark. Sure, they might get to $100K, but they’ll be working long hours in a job they either despise or have lukewarm feelings for. The friends I have who love their jobs are in public service, making $35K. The one friend in the middle, who kind of likes what he does and makes over $90K in Pittsburgh (age 29), has left 5 different jobs in 4 different cities to get to that point. Ironically, he wants to go back to school full-time for his MBA. To make a long story short, from my limited experience, there aren’t that many people with college degrees, even from top schools, who either like what they do or are making that much money.

That’s why when people say “T4 students shouldn’t be going to law school” or “making $60K after 3 years of law school isn’t worth it”…I would ask you to go out there and price cargo, sell insurance plans, or do some other bull office cubicle job at a big company where you’re paid to “know” and not to think. Furthermore, those of you who feel compelled to point out the lack of opportunities that develop from a T4 degree are making the assumption that (1) money is of the most importance to all law students and (2) that the jobs less desirable for T1 grads are also non-desirable to T4 grads.

I was your stereotypical undergrad slacker and poor-standardized test-taker and decided to attend a T4 school on the basis that I’d rather enjoy what I do for a living, even if it means that I finish in the bottom half of my class and have committed myself to 30 years of loan payments as a PD or Assistant DA. The way I looked at it was that if I had to make $40K-50K a year in my 20’s in a dead-end job that’s less desirable than masturbating with battery acid…I might as well do something I like in the process. If I wanted to make money, I’d take a page out of the book of my girlfriend’s aunt…who as a housewife, made over $100K last year daytrading stocks. It took my dad 20+ years as an assistant prosecutor to break the $100K barrier. However, he gets more satisfaction out of receiving letters from family members who have thanked him for his efforts than from some performance evaluation at a company...or for changing doody diapers while watching stock prices fluctuate on MSNBC

This isn’t to say that the critics of T3/T4 schools are totally out of the loop when it comes to students at these schools. IMO, the people from my T4 school were far more arrogant (and clueless) about the career they were pursuing than the people at my current T2 are. Many of these students bought into the idea that a law degree is a big money earner, regardless of where you go. Couple that with the fact that when you tell the common person you’re in law school, they “ooh and aah” and otherwise stroke your ego about what you’re doing and assume you’re going to be rich and successful. While many of these law students haven’t done their research, there are plenty of us who have realized and accepted some of the limitations that a degree from a less prestigious school may offer.

“Seriously though, I'm not trying to be a jerk or insult your school or you for choosing to attend it. I'm merely a proponent of full-disclosure. Prospective law students should know what they are getting into before they decide to take on massive amounts of debt for what are generally dismal job opportunities. And *most* schools (not just T3 and T4) do not readily provide that information.”

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Lower ranked schools should provide counseling sessions to prospective students discussing the legitimate job opportunities available to all students (not just the top 10%) upon graduation, in addition to those with scores who fit the “soon-to-be dropout” category of admitted students. Unfortunately, providing such frank information to prospective students (who fail to do the research themselves) would also take money out of the school’s pocket.

I hate to bring up affirmative action, but it is very fitting in this context. My school had such a problem with maintaining minority enrollment that the administration actually considered implementing different curves for minority students. Our school had a summer “pre-law school prep” course which required students in the bottom 25% for entering LSAT scores (just missed the mark myself) to take two weeks of “class” regarding how to brief a case, study for exams, outline, etc…one of my friends who was forced into this class (and dropped out) said that the vast majority of people enrolled in this course were minority students, and not once did the dean present to them the idea that the odds were against them with respect to not only graduating, but passing the bar and finding meaningful employment.

7 out of 9 minority students in my section either failed out or preemptively pulled themselves out of school after the first semester. Not one of those 7 students was remotely competent at answering questions in the classroom...they shouldn’t have been there since day one. It was only after a semester of tuition had gone down the drain that the assistant dean of the school pulled these individuals into her office and suggested that they dropout. Now these students are starting their lives with anywhere between $18-36K in debt having gained nothing but frustration and humiliation in the process.

On another note, I would say that while a T4 school is likely to produce a decent amount of bad lawyers, that these schools also produce far more “good” lawyers than just the “errant good lawyer.” There were some legitimate morons in my class…people incapable of accurately reciting the facts of a case by their 2nd semester of law school. On the other hand, the people I would consider to be potential “good lawyers” from these schools fall into one of a few classes: (1) the “overachiever” – guy with decent grades and an LSAT above the 75th percentile for that school receiving a scholarship (2) the “bright slacker/underachiever” – guy/gal with sub-3.0 GPA in college with higher LSAT scores (3) the “bright poor standardized test-taker/slacker” – guy capable of performing well in law school and beyond who habitually performs poorly on standardized tests or didn’t care much in college (4) the “afraid of change” student – person who didn’t get into school of choice in their region/town/city, yet went to the lower ranked school so they could stay put.

All of the five people in my study group at my T4 fit into at least one of these categories…one of them is ranked #1 with a $150K+ IP job at a big firm, the two ranked #3 and #5 have jobs lined up at big firms (one transferred to Michigan), the #18 guy has been working as a summer associate for a well-known mid-sized firm for the last year, and I (top 30%) transferred out and am currently ranked in the top 10% at my T2. That’s 5 people right there out of 90 in my section. While 2 of 5 of us ended up transferring out...we wouldn't have had the opportunity to transfer anywhere had we not been given a shot by a lower ranked school.

If you made it this far, thank you for reading my rant. At the end of the day, there are incompetent employees in all walks of life. For the person who suggested that all med school students are competent, ask Kanye West how he feels about that idea. Just because some schools are more likely to produce bad lawyers doesn't mean that the window of opportunity should close for those of us who might do great things despite not being as "smart" as our peers.

[thorc954]

hahaha, i didnt read all of your post, so i wont really respond, but I love the *&^% about "masturbating with battery acid."