The crock that is the law school scholarship

[Advocate]

No agenda, merely cynicism. It's as old and conservative as the Book of Ecclesiastes or as liberal and eccentric and the teachings of Diogenes of Sinope.

Point of advice: you'll make more friends and convince more people of your point of view if you avoid ad hominem attacks.  (Re-read the thread carefully, starting with your response)

[Top Cat]

I have an agenda, which I poorly attempt to mask as cynicism. It's as old and conservative as the Book of Ecclesiastes or as liberal and eccentric and the teachings of Diogenes of Sinope.

I believe you'll make more friends and convince more people of your point of view if you avoid ad hominem attacks, yet I wonder at night why I have no friends  It couldn't be because I make illogical jumps and assume that because someone holds the viewpoint that scholarships are fine the way they are, as opposed to a more socialist viewpoint like the one I have, they are right-wing fundamentalists who oppose all things good in the world.  I have poor logic abilities, which is the primary reason I was unable to get a good scholarship- I am therefore bitter at the entire system.  (Re-read the thread carefully, starting with my response, and you'll see my bitterness and ideology bleeding through everything that I say.)

Wow.  I would respond, but I don't think I could say it any better myself.

[Advocate]

Suck it 0L. I submit our little debate to a jury of our peers.  I think you'll find our fellow forumers will agree with me that you are a jackass.  Have a nice day.

PS: I am not the OP. I actually have a nice schoolership.

[Top Cat]

Suck it 0L. I submit our little debate to a jury of our peers.  I think you'll find our fellow forumers will agree with me that you are a jackass.  Have a nice day.

PS: I am not the OP. I actually have a nice schoolership.

[EdinTally]

yea that was a pretty poor initial argument TC; certainly room for improvement

just sayin

[RobWreck]

Cut TC some slack here... maybe once he's actually attended some law school classes he'll put together a better argument. If not, then hopefully he'll at least not completely derail future threads about the way law schools award intial and continuing scholarships with off topic arguments about the merits of capitalism over socialism.

[just Trev]

I'll share a secret: LIFE ISN'T FAIR!

Try to think like good old Judge Posner. Schools give out Schoolerships in their own self interest.  1L scholarships are distributed to entice high LSAT scoring students to matriculate in order to benefit the school's ranking.  2/3L scholarships are given to entice good students to stay at the school so that the school will have impressive graduates.  It is not necessary to give such a large scholarship to 2/3Ls because they basically already own you.

I know it's total bull, but that's how America rolls. Your law school education would be almost free if you lived in Europe. Socialized education! But Americans prefer this Ayn Rand, Wild West, Personal Autonomy nonsense

you kind of just explained how it isn't total bull in the preceding paragraph.  the fact is, working in one's own self-interest (even if you are an institution) is hardly "nonsense."  after all, you're getting something from going to the law school yourself... it's not like you were ordered to go there by the czar and then get screwed by the scholarship situation.  everyone [should] know what the hell they're getting themselves into before they embark on this journey. and even if you go into PI (contrary to what TC said) you're still serving yourself because it's (hypothetically) what you want to do with your life, or whatever.

[xxspykex]

While I agree with scholarship increases after entering law school being poo the reason why is because law schools only have to report UGPA/LSAT scores to USNews. Those affect their rankings and therefore they want to increase their number, which means they are willing to scholarships to people that will increase their numbers. Doing well after your first year really doesn't do jack for USNews rankings, nor do transfer students, which is why law schools will usually not give scholarships for either of those (or you might get a modest scholly if you did really well because the school doesn't want really a high attrition rate).

[just Trev]

this isn't necessarily true.  after all, peer/judge rankings are the most significant portion of the USNews ranking, and those rankings are affected by the graduates of the school getting out into the legal community and making a name for themselves and their school with the quality of their work.  presumably, the top of the class from each school would be in the best position to make a positive impact on their peers with clerkships, biglaw appointments, and other top legal jobs.  therefore, it could be rational to believe that keeping the top of the class has as big (if not more than) an impact as the entering class' LSAT/GPA. 

the nuance to this however, is that most schools probably keep the top of their classes even without providing extra scholarship monies because that is where many of the top students will have the best opportunity to excel in their career.  (apathy or ignorance about the transfer process could also be a reason many of the top students stay at their respective school).

so, for whatever the reason, some schools have not found it necessary or fruitful to provide extra money to top of the class students.  knowing this, if financial considerations are paramount to a student, s/he should go to a school where they get a lot of money.