Grad School before Law School?

<p>LOL, how can it be ED if it isn’t early? That makes no sense.</p>

<p>

Well, that makes absolutely no sense in the context of this discussion.</p>

<p>And visit campus? You think these schools are in my backyard? What a joke.</p>

<p>fc- that is the point. To re-open ED in January/February doesn’t “make sense” unless the school (UVA) is trying to get it’s acceptance rate up to “game the system”. Nolocon is absolutely right- UVA extended their ED deadline last year. It was the “talk” of TLS. As my kid went through the admission process last cycle, I followed the website pretty closely last year.</p>

<p>Though LS admissions is strictly LSAT/GPA, some schools know how to play the admission game better than others in order to get higher stats and ultimately a higher ranking on USNWR.
And yes, Law school admission is a bit of a game. But you still need the basic stats to get in. And from what I saw last year, a 168/ 3.6 (or some combo of those 2 stats) is pretty much the minimum you need for a T-14 acceptance.</p>

<p>Well, unless some of them are lying about their 25-75 range, that 168 just isn’t correct. Stanford says their 25-75 range is 166-170, therefore over 25% of their students had less than a 168. Stanford is a top 14, no? Berkeley is 165-170, Penn 166-171…there are more. The stats just do not support the statements being made. Of course the lower your LSAT the higher your GPA needs to be to make up for it. That’s common sense (absent million $$ donations).</p>

<p>I also am failing to see how this ED thing at UVA makes a difference, since people can apply RD and still get turned down. An app is an app and a rejection is a rejection. I am sure I am missing something here. But I know I am right on the stats above, if the reported scores are correct. I see no reason they would report them falsely lower.</p>

<p>As ED applicants are obligated to attend if offered a spot, UVA doesn’t have to offer as many acceptances as they know they will fill seats with ED applicants. The less number of acceptances the school makes to ensure full enrollment, the higher the yield rate and selectivity rate is. I am sure someone can probably explain it better. But YUP offering ED in the winter is a way to game the system. </p>

<p>and though the 25% at most T-14’s are 166/167, it may be aimed more for the 166/ 4.0 GPA candidate. This allows the school to stay within the 25% LSAT, and maybe bump up the gpa a bit by taking a 166/ 4.0 student.<br>
I’d like to say that the 166/ 3.6 student has a good shot at a T-14 admittance, but IMHO, I don’t think it is happening–unless there is something unique about their background.
I kinda forgot if your kid is going through the process now- but his background might put him in a unique category. but for most regular folk, a 168 LSAT (or 166/ 4.0 GPA combo) is minimum stat needed for a T-14 acceptance.</p>

<p>I found reading TLS last year interesting. It gave me the most insight as to what was going on with admissions. Certainly didn’t get that much info from my own kid as she never goes to these websites.</p>

<p>Well, don’t know about the 4.0 part, but I agree with the implication, as I already said. Naturally the 164-166 or whatever the numbers might be would have to have pretty strong grades (or a really big checkbook, lol). Yeah, don’t know if his dual area of study, and particularly that one which seems to have some real needs in the marketplace, might squeak him into a school he might not otherwise get into. He is right at the borderline for schools about 8-14 or so, better chances for the next 6 which still isn’t bad.</p>

<p>Despite the cynicism by some posters, I think there are strong potential positions for someone with the right talents plus a law degree. At least that is what I am finding from people in the area in which he is heading. The thing that makes it hard is that no one can predict the future. Today something is hot, 3-4 years from now it is not and vice-versa. But I think by focusing on areas where the future looks strong (China, Russia, Brazil, etc) one’s chances are better, at least.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>:shrug: My general experience in life has been that when people make self-serving statements and don’t provide proof, those statements are usually exaggerated and quite frequently false.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I have no idea where they are in relation to you. Anyway, I’m pretty confident that there are ways to do your due dilligence. Especially given the amount of money involved.</p>

<p>You have no idea where they are in relation to me? How does it matter? They are hundreds, if not over a thousand miles apart, they cannot all be close. One at most. I could go to that one, maybe, but then you would complain my sample size was too small. Besides, I doubt I would learn a lot more in person than I did over the phone. They would probably escort me off campus, lol. How would I even identify the students in this program? You are good at being cynical, but a bit short on specific and meaningful solutions.</p>

<p>I have done more due diligence than most by calling two and asking the questions and getting specific examples of their success. If one researched every decision in life to the degree you suggest, we would always be paralyzed. Clearly there is value in this line of academic study. I don’t need to know 100% the exact rate of return, I know enough to be confident it will return quite a bit in quality of life educationally and professionally, and hopefully financially.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Correct. If you wish to share that information, please feel free.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I wouldn’t complain about anything. It’s your money at stake, not mine. But anyway, I would have a lot more confidence in your claims if you could honestly say that you visited one middle-of-the-road school, talked to 5 or 6 students about the job prospects of them and their classmates, and got positive responses.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s probably true. When I went to law school, I just went by the statistics in their brochure which boasted a 99% placement rate. In hindsight, that was pretty boneheaded of me.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s true, but some decisions are more important than others. Law school is a big investment of time and money. Moreover, if you borrow money to attend law school, it’s nearly impossible to get rid of the debt in bankrupty. The decision to attend law school is similar in magnitde to the decision to buy a house. </p>

<p>If you are buying a $400 television set, it may make sense to take the word of the salesman. If you are buying a $300,000 house, it’s worth the trouble to hire an independent expert to inspect the house; to check out the neighborhood at different times of the day and week; and so on.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“excuse me, are you a student here” might work pretty well. And I doubt you would get escorted off campus. Heck, they might welcome you to spend a day there and sit in on a few classes. If they refuse to let you come on to the campus, that itself should tell you something. And even if they did, there are usually plenty of eateries where students go for lunch.</p>

<p>Anyway, I’ve never known a school which bars entry to prospective students or their parents.</p>

<p>You can see where I live, it is right by my screen name. It wouldn’t matter anyway, as I already pointed out the schools that have these programs are in very different areas of the country.</p>

<p>As far as talking to students, it isn’t just a matter of being a student there, it is a matter of being in a very specific program. You are not reading the posts. I don’t care if a general law student has good prospects, it is very different from what we are researching. That is why I was able to get such specific information regarding placements of students in this particular dual degree program. I made that very clear.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well to assess the distance, I would need to know where these programs are. I would guess at least one or two are in the Northeast.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“Excuse me, woudl you happen to be in Program X or do you know someone? I’m thinking of applying and I was hoping to talk with a few people who are in the program.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I fail to see how this is a negative. Why should you be afraid that you’ll find something you want to do that doesn’t require a law degree and which you wouldn’t want to stop in order to attend law school? To be frank, it sounds like you’ve decided that you want to go to law school whether or not it makes any sense.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>What is the supposed logic for this move? Those numbers are almost irrelevant to a school’s ranking. Acceptance rate accounts for something like 2.5% of a school’s score with USNWR, compared to 12.5% for median LSAT and and 10% for median GPA. Yield doesn’t factor in at all. If lowering the acceptance rate has the effect of lowering the LSAT or GPA medians, as seems to be the implication, it would be totally counter-productive.</p>

<p>I was focusing on the unusual move by UVA to re-open the ED cycle to January/february and how it might appear that they were trying to manipulate its acceptance stats. I’m sure the purpose was NOT to lower their LSAT or GPA medians.
On the contrary- there may have been a good # of (ex.) 171/3.5 students who got shut out of T-6’s last cycle and a february ED application might have assured them a spot in a T-10 school like UVA. </p>

<p>I find it suspect that ED was once again offered as an option after the first big wave of rejections were made last cycle. Therefore I felt UVA was trying to manipulate its stats to move up in the rankings by offering an ED option in the winter. But that is just my opinion based on UVA’s “unique” admisssion process last year. I am curious if UVA will offer ED this winter as an option.</p>

<p>anyway- did we scare cpeace away? Haven’t seen a posting from OP is a while.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The effect for extending the ED deadline is two-fold:
(1) Lower acceptance rate
(2) Higher LSAT and GPA medians - This results because their class is primarily comprised of both types of splitters (high GPA/low LSAT and high LSAT/low GPA). It’s easy to get high medians by accepting a class of would-be T-14 Regular Decision rejects by accepting only splitters. Although USNews used to average the 25 and 75th LSAT and GPA when computing rankings, beginning a couple years ago, it reverted back to only using the medians. It’s really easy to get high medians when you dish out fee waivers to everyone with one high number, hence encouraging splitters to apply, and accept low 160s/4.0s and 170s/3.2s who would be rejected at every other T-14 via RD. Although your 25ths are low compared to other schools’ 25ths, your medians would remain high. Indeed, since UVA started using this “accept only splitters” method, while yield protecting people with both high numbers, a couple years ago, their medians have increased.</p>

<p>lskinner - If you read the posts, you would see where the programs are to which I was referring. You could learn if you just read. So actually no, none of them are in the Northeast. Technically there is one at Columbia, but since that is a top 5 law school, it wouldn’t really answer the question, would it. You talk, but it would be more meaningful if you knew what you were talking about. If you have days of free time to go talk to students like that, let me know. Maybe you can do it for me. You have to pay your own airfare though. Just silly.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Did you post a complete list somewhere?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Possibly not, but it would still be interesting. I would guess that your average Columbia MIA/JD student is having a lot of trouble getting that UN job at the moment.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No need to get snippy. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not the one who is about to drop $200k and 4 years of my life.</p>

<p>No, you are not, but you have had nothing useful to say either. You guess at things (and btw there are a ton more opportunities than just the UN, as I also stated), but you value that above direct conversations and evidence provided by people from two programs in the area of interest. Apparently you just want to take a negative point of view and have it be true no matter what. You can rest assured I know you think it is a bad idea. It has completely swayed my opinion (heavy sarcasm).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sure of course. Common sense always trumps unverified self-serving claims. Currently there are lots of law school graduates having a lot of trouble getting jobs, both legal and non-legal. Even from some of the top rated schools for which you need an LSAT score higher than 163. So it’s hard to believe that tweaking the degree can make such a big difference. Especially if it’s towards an area of the law with an international flavor. Which is probably even more competitive.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not necessarily. I follow the facts and when I get new facts I change my mind. I used to think law school was a good idea but I changed my mind a year or two ago.</p>

<p>Anyway, you never answered my question:</p>

<p>Did you post a complete list of programs somewhere?</p>

<p>No, I gave examples because my intention wasn’t and isn’t to feed you. The fact that you come up with the flimsy “go check at the schools themselves, there must be some in your backyard” is as worthless as most of your other comments. Your supposition on international when it comes to some critical languages is completely wrong as well. In fact, there is a real shortage of highly educated American born fluent speakers of some languages, including Russian. There is no common sense in your statements, since I was asking about a very specific skill set and program, yet you continue to generalize. This conversation is over.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well in that case, there was no way for me to know how many, if any, were close to Rhode Island. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m very skeptical of this claim. There may be a need for Russian interpreters, but lawyers who happen to speak Russian? I doubt it. I knew lots of attorneys who spoke foreign languages – including Russian – and none of them were able to use their language skills to improve their career options. I suppose foreign language skills might be helpful if you wanted to do immigration law. But in that case, there’s no need to attend a joint degree program. Just go to law school and study language on the side.</p>

<p>Where’s your evidence that there is a huge demand for Russian-speaking attorneys? Is it just that a couple law school representatives told you so? Did you get it from the same place you learned that “Law school can be excellent preparation for a lot of careers”? </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Goodbye.</p>