Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?  (Read 5511 times)

bobwil50

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2006, 07:12:38 PM »
No, you're not stupid... What most people won't tell you is that any ABA accredited school, whether it's Harvard or Florida Coastal, enables its graduates to practice anywhere in the country, provided they pass the respective bar exam.

Yeah, I hear Florida Coastal competes pretty well with Harvard too.

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in. Yes, some schools have a better alumni network, but you don't NEED connections to start out well. I know several DOZEN lawyers who all started at non-ABA's in California, transferred to a T4 ABA, graduated, and started their own practices. Several attained 7-figures within 5 years of graduating, simply because they essentially started their own businesses and made their own contacts.


I know people that have won the lottery.  Thus, playing the lottery is a good idea.

Quote
The way I look at it, is that if I wanted to work for someone else all my life, I wouldn't have pursued law school. Why spend tens of thousands of $$$ and several years of your life learning how to work for someone else in a firm, killing yourself to make partner, when it may never happen?

If you want to work for yourself, don't go to law school period.

I can't tell if this is flame or idiocy.

After two years and two admission cycles on this board, I have finally figured it out.

High-scoring LSAT takers, for the most part, like to comment on the viability of a T3 or T4 law degree, stating that very little exists for those poor and stupid souls who were unfortunate enough to score under the 75th percentile.  They write fluid prose denouncing regional schools and the tiny firms that recruit from them, and announce, as though they have real world experience to back it up, that if it ain't T1, you may as well not go.

I recognized early on that listening to the advice of a 22 year-old college grad or junior was in bad form.  Not because you have no idea what you are talking about in general, but because you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to the legal community (as far as I can tell, not a single of you has served a single day as an attorney).  What I never recognized was the motivation behind this behavior.  Many of you are self-proclaimed liberals, so the "elitism" argument made little sense (except for the fact that most liberals are hypocrites).  Many of you are probably nice people in person, so the idea that perhaps you're just a toolshed was tossed aside.  I was left scratching my head.

But I finally figured it out.

You, and many people like you, scored well on the LSAT.  And you want a cookie, a slap on the back, a big warm hug of congratulations.  Because I do not log onto this site with a gaping mouth eagerly awaiting your c0ck, you assume that I am not proud of your achievement, or that I am not jealous or in awe.  So you lash out - you claim that only a select few from non-T1 schools will succeed.  You claim that if people like me are not retaking the LSAT over and over again with a 170+ in mind, we are mindless troglodytes who have been sold on a non-existent dream.

Well, here's to you, high-LSAT-taker!  Cheers!  Congrats!  Huzzah!  I open my arms, and welcome you into my loving embrace!  Congrats on your score, and congrats on your T14 acceptances!  YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME!  :)   

Disclaimer:  Before you respond angrily with an example of how you've defended t3/t4 schools, consider this:  if the shoe fits, wear it.

Chill, dude.

I am not suggesting that a T3/T4 degree is worthless, but I will ridicule someone who says this:

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in.

This is simply not correct.  A T14 grad has much more "employment potential" than a T3/T4 grad.  If you peruse employment data, you'll find that this is obviously the case.  Law is a prestige-oriented profession.

And it is just exacerbates the problem when someone says, "I know a T4 grad who is doing great!"  This doesn't change the fact that a higher-ranked school will open up a wealth of opportunities that would be unavailable to a T4 grad.

I am not looking for a cookie or a pat on the back.  I think the people that indulge others' self-delusions do much more harm.
LSAT: 168
GPA: 3.8

militarygrade

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #11 on: May 18, 2006, 07:23:44 PM »
No, you're not stupid... What most people won't tell you is that any ABA accredited school, whether it's Harvard or Florida Coastal, enables its graduates to practice anywhere in the country, provided they pass the respective bar exam.

Yeah, I hear Florida Coastal competes pretty well with Harvard too.

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in. Yes, some schools have a better alumni network, but you don't NEED connections to start out well. I know several DOZEN lawyers who all started at non-ABA's in California, transferred to a T4 ABA, graduated, and started their own practices. Several attained 7-figures within 5 years of graduating, simply because they essentially started their own businesses and made their own contacts.


I know people that have won the lottery.  Thus, playing the lottery is a good idea.

Quote
The way I look at it, is that if I wanted to work for someone else all my life, I wouldn't have pursued law school. Why spend tens of thousands of $$$ and several years of your life learning how to work for someone else in a firm, killing yourself to make partner, when it may never happen?

If you want to work for yourself, don't go to law school period.

I can't tell if this is flame or idiocy.

After two years and two admission cycles on this board, I have finally figured it out.

High-scoring LSAT takers, for the most part, like to comment on the viability of a T3 or T4 law degree, stating that very little exists for those poor and stupid souls who were unfortunate enough to score under the 75th percentile.  They write fluid prose denouncing regional schools and the tiny firms that recruit from them, and announce, as though they have real world experience to back it up, that if it ain't T1, you may as well not go.

I recognized early on that listening to the advice of a 22 year-old college grad or junior was in bad form.  Not because you have no idea what you are talking about in general, but because you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to the legal community (as far as I can tell, not a single of you has served a single day as an attorney).  What I never recognized was the motivation behind this behavior.  Many of you are self-proclaimed liberals, so the "elitism" argument made little sense (except for the fact that most liberals are hypocrites).  Many of you are probably nice people in person, so the idea that perhaps you're just a toolshed was tossed aside.  I was left scratching my head.

But I finally figured it out.

You, and many people like you, scored well on the LSAT.  And you want a cookie, a slap on the back, a big warm hug of congratulations.  Because I do not log onto this site with a gaping mouth eagerly awaiting your c0ck, you assume that I am not proud of your achievement, or that I am not jealous or in awe.  So you lash out - you claim that only a select few from non-T1 schools will succeed.  You claim that if people like me are not retaking the LSAT over and over again with a 170+ in mind, we are mindless troglodytes who have been sold on a non-existent dream.

Well, here's to you, high-LSAT-taker!  Cheers!  Congrats!  Huzzah!  I open my arms, and welcome you into my loving embrace!  Congrats on your score, and congrats on your T14 acceptances!  YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME!  :)   

Disclaimer:  Before you respond angrily with an example of how you've defended t3/t4 schools, consider this:  if the shoe fits, wear it.

Chill, dude.

I am not suggesting that a T3/T4 degree is worthless, but I will ridicule someone who says this:

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in.

This is simply not correct.  A T14 grad has much more "employment potential" than a T3/T4 grad.  If you peruse employment data, you'll find that this is obviously the case.  Law is a prestige-oriented profession.

And it is just exacerbates the problem when someone says, "I know a T4 grad who is doing great!"  This doesn't change the fact that a higher-ranked school will open up a wealth of opportunities that would be unavailable to a T4 grad.

I am not looking for a cookie or a pat on the back.  I think the people that indulge others' self-delusions do much more harm.

There are no t3/t4 delusions that I see running rampant on this board.  For the most part, those relegated to non-T1 schools fully recognize the fact that getting a $145,000 big-law job will be next to impossible.

What I do see is people stating that there ARE job prospects for those coming from lower ranked schools.  They may be $60k, $70k, and $80k jobs at best, but we are talking about starting salaries.  While one test may dictate the schools that one might attend, it does not, by any means, dictate the success of that candidate.  Will I go on to become a SCOTUS clerk?  Highly unlikely.  Will I be courted by exceptionally high-powered law firms in my third year?  Probably not.  Will I leave law school with the guarantee of $100k as a first-year associate?  Highly doubtful.

But I will be employed.  And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes.  T1s open doors, but they do not keep them open forever.  Hard work and talented lawyering skills do.  There are a great many lawyers who did not attend a t1 schools--are you ready to assert that only a select few have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that less than a majority have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that those who went to a t3/t4 school and failed in life would have done better had they scored higher on the LSAT and gained admittance to HYS?

The only real delusions I see on this board are the ones concerning the importance of a T1 school, and the lack of future prospects coming out of a "ttt".

militarygrade

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2006, 07:30:25 PM »
I especially love the part about how 22-yr-old college kids with high LSAT scores aren't qualified to discuss this, because apparently firsthand experience is more trustworthy than objective statistical data.

Post a link to a website that has objective statistical data on the long-term relvency of a T1 education over a t3/t4 education.  I'm not looking for data that shows that first-year associates from Harvard make more than first-year associates from Widener.  What I'm looking for is data that proves that a majority of t3/t4 grads suffer greatly in their lifetimes as a result of their law school's rankings.

If you can do that, then I will consider listening to 22-year-old college students over 22-year-veterans of the legal community.



militarygrade

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #13 on: May 18, 2006, 07:34:29 PM »
 
Disclaimer:  Before you respond angrily with an example of how you've defended t3/t4 schools, consider this:  if the shoe fits, wear it.

But clearly you want the "prestigious" people to notice you and your opinions.  You're like the abused child who acts up purposefully to get negative attention becuase its the only kind he knows how to get.

When did I say I didn't want to get noticed?  Are you able to win an argument only when your opponent allows you to put words in his mouth?

I put that disclaimer up because, surprisingly, there are a few people on this board with stellar LSAT scores who do not continually bash t3/t4 schools and candidates.  I did not want to lump them together with the rest of you.

Take your nickelodeon psychology elsewhere.  

bobwil50

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #14 on: May 18, 2006, 07:36:26 PM »

There are no t3/t4 delusions that I see running rampant on this board.  For the most part, those relegated to non-T1 schools fully recognize the fact that getting a $145,000 big-law job will be next to impossible.

What I do see is people stating that there ARE job prospects for those coming from lower ranked schools.  They may be $60k, $70k, and $80k jobs at best, but we are talking about starting salaries.  While one test may dictate the schools that one might attend, it does not, by any means, dictate the success of that candidate.  Will I go on to become a SCOTUS clerk?  Highly unlikely.  Will I be courted by exceptionally high-powered law firms in my third year?  Probably not.  Will I leave law school with the guarantee of $100k as a first-year associate?  Highly doubtful.

Actually, I agree with quite a bit of what you said here.  But when someone mitigates the importance of "employment potential," they need to be corrected.  The point of this thread is the difference between Suffolk with a full ride and Georgetown.  Unless the OP's goal is to work in a mid-sized firm in Boston, Georgetown is the obvious choice.

Quote
But I will be employed.  And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes.  T1s open doors, but they do not keep them open forever.  Hard work and talented lawyering skills do.  There are a great many lawyers who did not attend a t1 schools--are you ready to assert that only a select few have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that less than a majority have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that those who went to a t3/t4 school and failed in life would have done better had they scored higher on the LSAT and gained admittance to HYS?

This depends on what you mean by successful.  The fact of the matter is that a T1 graduate will have the same opportunities open to a T3/T4, and then some.  I am not disputing that T3/T4 grads can't be successful, just that it will be much harder for them.  I think in the case of the OP, it is certainly worth the 100k or so in tuition, unless his goals are much narrower than most law students'.

LSAT: 168
GPA: 3.8

mirror

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2006, 07:38:43 PM »
No, you're not stupid... What most people won't tell you is that any ABA accredited school, whether it's Harvard or Florida Coastal, enables its graduates to practice anywhere in the country, provided they pass the respective bar exam.

Yeah, I hear Florida Coastal competes pretty well with Harvard too.

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in. Yes, some schools have a better alumni network, but you don't NEED connections to start out well. I know several DOZEN lawyers who all started at non-ABA's in California, transferred to a T4 ABA, graduated, and started their own practices. Several attained 7-figures within 5 years of graduating, simply because they essentially started their own businesses and made their own contacts.


I know people that have won the lottery.  Thus, playing the lottery is a good idea.

Quote
The way I look at it, is that if I wanted to work for someone else all my life, I wouldn't have pursued law school. Why spend tens of thousands of $$$ and several years of your life learning how to work for someone else in a firm, killing yourself to make partner, when it may never happen?

If you want to work for yourself, don't go to law school period.

I can't tell if this is flame or idiocy.

After two years and two admission cycles on this board, I have finally figured it out.

High-scoring LSAT takers, for the most part, like to comment on the viability of a T3 or T4 law degree, stating that very little exists for those poor and stupid souls who were unfortunate enough to score under the 75th percentile.  They write fluid prose denouncing regional schools and the tiny firms that recruit from them, and announce, as though they have real world experience to back it up, that if it ain't T1, you may as well not go.

I recognized early on that listening to the advice of a 22 year-old college grad or junior was in bad form.  Not because you have no idea what you are talking about in general, but because you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to the legal community (as far as I can tell, not a single of you has served a single day as an attorney).  What I never recognized was the motivation behind this behavior.  Many of you are self-proclaimed liberals, so the "elitism" argument made little sense (except for the fact that most liberals are hypocrites).  Many of you are probably nice people in person, so the idea that perhaps you're just a toolshed was tossed aside.  I was left scratching my head.

But I finally figured it out.

You, and many people like you, scored well on the LSAT.  And you want a cookie, a slap on the back, a big warm hug of congratulations.  Because I do not log onto this site with a gaping mouth eagerly awaiting your c0ck, you assume that I am not proud of your achievement, or that I am not jealous or in awe.  So you lash out - you claim that only a select few from non-T1 schools will succeed.  You claim that if people like me are not retaking the LSAT over and over again with a 170+ in mind, we are mindless troglodytes who have been sold on a non-existent dream.

Well, here's to you, high-LSAT-taker!  Cheers!  Congrats!  Huzzah!  I open my arms, and welcome you into my loving embrace!  Congrats on your score, and congrats on your T14 acceptances!  YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME!  :)   

Disclaimer:  Before you respond angrily with an example of how you've defended t3/t4 schools, consider this:  if the shoe fits, wear it.

Chill, dude.

I am not suggesting that a T3/T4 degree is worthless, but I will ridicule someone who says this:

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in.

This is simply not correct.  A T14 grad has much more "employment potential" than a T3/T4 grad.  If you peruse employment data, you'll find that this is obviously the case.  Law is a prestige-oriented profession.

And it is just exacerbates the problem when someone says, "I know a T4 grad who is doing great!"  This doesn't change the fact that a higher-ranked school will open up a wealth of opportunities that would be unavailable to a T4 grad.

I am not looking for a cookie or a pat on the back.  I think the people that indulge others' self-delusions do much more harm.

There are no t3/t4 delusions that I see running rampant on this board.  For the most part, those relegated to non-T1 schools fully recognize the fact that getting a $145,000 big-law job will be next to impossible.

What I do see is people stating that there ARE job prospects for those coming from lower ranked schools.  They may be $60k, $70k, and $80k jobs at best, but we are talking about starting salaries.  While one test may dictate the schools that one might attend, it does not, by any means, dictate the success of that candidate.  Will I go on to become a SCOTUS clerk?  Highly unlikely.  Will I be courted by exceptionally high-powered law firms in my third year?  Probably not.  Will I leave law school with the guarantee of $100k as a first-year associate?  Highly doubtful.

But I will be employed.  And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes.  T1s open doors, but they do not keep them open forever.  Hard work and talented lawyering skills do.  There are a great many lawyers who did not attend a t1 schools--are you ready to assert that only a select few have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that less than a majority have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that those who went to a t3/t4 school and failed in life would have done better had they scored higher on the LSAT and gained admittance to HYS?

The only real delusions I see on this board are the ones concerning the importance of a T1 school, and the lack of future prospects coming out of a "ttt".

easy tiger, get a grip.  

"And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes."

This is perhaps my favorite rationale used by delusional TTT people.  Of course some t14 grads fail miserably and some ttt grads become wildly successful.  However, do you honestly think that after say 3 years of being a lawyer, the scoreboard resets and nobody knows where you went to law school or what firm youve worked at for the past 3 years?  Do you think they can conveniently forget this info but somehow ascertain how good of a lawyer you are?  Do yo really not see the correlation b/w your reputation as a lawyer and your resume? Its not like in your 5th year as an associate, everyone gets invited to Lawyerama to prove their true worth.  

mirror

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 263
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2006, 07:39:18 PM »
No, you're not stupid... What most people won't tell you is that any ABA accredited school, whether it's Harvard or Florida Coastal, enables its graduates to practice anywhere in the country, provided they pass the respective bar exam.

Yeah, I hear Florida Coastal competes pretty well with Harvard too.

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in. Yes, some schools have a better alumni network, but you don't NEED connections to start out well. I know several DOZEN lawyers who all started at non-ABA's in California, transferred to a T4 ABA, graduated, and started their own practices. Several attained 7-figures within 5 years of graduating, simply because they essentially started their own businesses and made their own contacts.


I know people that have won the lottery.  Thus, playing the lottery is a good idea.

Quote
The way I look at it, is that if I wanted to work for someone else all my life, I wouldn't have pursued law school. Why spend tens of thousands of $$$ and several years of your life learning how to work for someone else in a firm, killing yourself to make partner, when it may never happen?

If you want to work for yourself, don't go to law school period.

I can't tell if this is flame or idiocy.

After two years and two admission cycles on this board, I have finally figured it out.

High-scoring LSAT takers, for the most part, like to comment on the viability of a T3 or T4 law degree, stating that very little exists for those poor and stupid souls who were unfortunate enough to score under the 75th percentile.  They write fluid prose denouncing regional schools and the tiny firms that recruit from them, and announce, as though they have real world experience to back it up, that if it ain't T1, you may as well not go.

I recognized early on that listening to the advice of a 22 year-old college grad or junior was in bad form.  Not because you have no idea what you are talking about in general, but because you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to the legal community (as far as I can tell, not a single of you has served a single day as an attorney).  What I never recognized was the motivation behind this behavior.  Many of you are self-proclaimed liberals, so the "elitism" argument made little sense (except for the fact that most liberals are hypocrites).  Many of you are probably nice people in person, so the idea that perhaps you're just a toolshed was tossed aside.  I was left scratching my head.

But I finally figured it out.

You, and many people like you, scored well on the LSAT.  And you want a cookie, a slap on the back, a big warm hug of congratulations.  Because I do not log onto this site with a gaping mouth eagerly awaiting your c0ck, you assume that I am not proud of your achievement, or that I am not jealous or in awe.  So you lash out - you claim that only a select few from non-T1 schools will succeed.  You claim that if people like me are not retaking the LSAT over and over again with a 170+ in mind, we are mindless troglodytes who have been sold on a non-existent dream.

Well, here's to you, high-LSAT-taker!  Cheers!  Congrats!  Huzzah!  I open my arms, and welcome you into my loving embrace!  Congrats on your score, and congrats on your T14 acceptances!  YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME!  :)   

Disclaimer:  Before you respond angrily with an example of how you've defended t3/t4 schools, consider this:  if the shoe fits, wear it.

Chill, dude.

I am not suggesting that a T3/T4 degree is worthless, but I will ridicule someone who says this:

Quote
While everyone is hung up on "employment potential", they ignore the fact that having a law degree is much like having a college diploma: you get out of it what you put in.

This is simply not correct.  A T14 grad has much more "employment potential" than a T3/T4 grad.  If you peruse employment data, you'll find that this is obviously the case.  Law is a prestige-oriented profession.

And it is just exacerbates the problem when someone says, "I know a T4 grad who is doing great!"  This doesn't change the fact that a higher-ranked school will open up a wealth of opportunities that would be unavailable to a T4 grad.

I am not looking for a cookie or a pat on the back.  I think the people that indulge others' self-delusions do much more harm.

There are no t3/t4 delusions that I see running rampant on this board.  For the most part, those relegated to non-T1 schools fully recognize the fact that getting a $145,000 big-law job will be next to impossible.

What I do see is people stating that there ARE job prospects for those coming from lower ranked schools.  They may be $60k, $70k, and $80k jobs at best, but we are talking about starting salaries.  While one test may dictate the schools that one might attend, it does not, by any means, dictate the success of that candidate.  Will I go on to become a SCOTUS clerk?  Highly unlikely.  Will I be courted by exceptionally high-powered law firms in my third year?  Probably not.  Will I leave law school with the guarantee of $100k as a first-year associate?  Highly doubtful.

But I will be employed.  And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes.  T1s open doors, but they do not keep them open forever.  Hard work and talented lawyering skills do.  There are a great many lawyers who did not attend a t1 schools--are you ready to assert that only a select few have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that less than a majority have become successful?  Are you ready to assert that those who went to a t3/t4 school and failed in life would have done better had they scored higher on the LSAT and gained admittance to HYS?

The only real delusions I see on this board are the ones concerning the importance of a T1 school, and the lack of future prospects coming out of a "ttt".

easy tiger, get a grip.  

"And my performance while employed will dictate my future successes."

This is perhaps my favorite rationale used by delusional TTT people.  Of course some t14 grads fail miserably and some ttt grads become wildly successful.  However, do you honestly think that after say 3 years of being a lawyer, the scoreboard resets and nobody knows where you went to law school or what firm youve worked at for the past 3 years?  Do you think they can conveniently forget this info but somehow ascertain how good of a lawyer you are?  Do yo really not see the correlation b/w your reputation as a lawyer and your resume? Its not like in your 5th year as an associate, everyone gets invited to Lawyerama to prove their true worth.  

militarygrade

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2006, 07:41:16 PM »


At many low-ranked law schools, the average starting salary is much less than 60-80k, we're talking about 100k+ in debt, and a small but significant number of graduates are unable to find legal employment.

Having mastered logic enough to score in the 90th percentile on the LSAT, I would assume that many of the people I am referring to in this thread can recognize the difference between "many" and "all".  Just because "many" of the lower-ranked schools have average starting salaries less than 60-80k, it does not mean that "all" do.  It is does not prove that "all" students coming from those schools with low average starting salaries will earn nothing higher.

I'm also a bit confused over the "100k in debt" that gets tossed around here so much.  I've read countless threads from t14-bound student claiming that they want to go into public-interest law.  I rarely see the same criticism of them.  If I go to a t3 schools and rack up 100k in debt (which I won't, by the way) in order to make $50k, it's a stupid decision.  If someone goes to Yale, racks up 100k in debt, and goes into a public-interest sector law and makes $50k, it's "noble".  :confused"  


krumanadi

  • Guest
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #18 on: May 18, 2006, 07:42:07 PM »
This board does have a way of destroying my self confidence.....

How so?  I had a similar feeling when I first started here, but all in all, the knowledge you gain gives you a leg up on everyone who didn't go on one of these boards..

bobwil50

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: stupid for heading to a low ranked school?
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2006, 07:42:28 PM »
I especially love the part about how 22-yr-old college kids with high LSAT scores aren't qualified to discuss this, because apparently firsthand experience is more trustworthy than objective statistical data.

Post a link to a website that has objective statistical data on the long-term relvency of a T1 education over a t3/t4 education.  I'm not looking for data that shows that first-year associates from Harvard make more than first-year associates from Widener.  What I'm looking for is data that proves that a majority of t3/t4 grads suffer greatly in their lifetimes as a result of their law school's rankings.

If you can do that, then I will consider listening to 22-year-old college students over 22-year-veterans of the legal community.




http://powerscore.com/lsat/help/salary.htm
LSAT: 168
GPA: 3.8