Why Law Degrees are worth nothing (unless you're from a top school like Harvard)?

Graduate School Law School
21

<p>bluebayou, (1) LSAT score means AND standard deviations and (2) numbers of applicants are relevant here. </p>

<p>LSAT scores and numbers of test-takers are here:</p>

<p><a href=“http://carrefoursagesse.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2009/03/10/breakdown-of-sex-and-racial-group-differences-in-lsat-scores/”>http://carrefoursagesse.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2009/03/10/breakdown-of-sex-and-racial-group-differences-in-lsat-scores/&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“What Is a Good LSAT Score? Score Ranges by School”>http://testprep.about.com/od/thelsat/a/Average_LSAT_Gender_Ethnicity.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Asian and white LSAT mean scores are virtually identical; there is only a small gap. However, the standard deviation in LSAT scores for Asians is much higher, meaning that there is much more variation in Asian LSAT scores, and so even if the Asian mean is about the same as the white mean, there are more Asians at the higher and lower ends of the scale-and thus more highly-scoring Asians than the mean, by itself, would indicate. </p>

<p>The Asian student body composition at top law schools is somewhat lower than would be expected based on the numbers of Asians taking the LSAT (particularly with high scores). That’s the “cap”.</p>

<p>More details about the “cap” are here (although the numbers below are not just for law schools, unfortunately):</p>

<p><a href=“I'm Not Asian - JESSE WASHINGTON * ANDSCAPE * ESPN * THE UNDEFEATED”>http://www.jessewashington.com/im-not-asian.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>"Asian students have higher average SAT scores than any other group, including whites. A study by Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade examined applicants to top colleges from 1997, when the maximum SAT score was 1600 (today it’s 2400). Espenshade found that Asian-Americans needed a 1550 SAT to have an equal chance of getting into an elite college as white students with a 1410 or black students with an 1100.</p>

<p>Top schools that don’t ask about race in admissions process have very high percentages of Asian students. The California Institute of Technology, a private school that chooses not to consider race, is about one-third Asian. (Thirteen percent of California residents have Asian heritage.) The University of California-Berkeley, which is forbidden by state law to consider race in admissions, is more than 40 percent Asian — up from about 20 percent before the law was passed."</p>

<p>In short, zoosermom’s assertion that Asians are “over represented” is patently false, based on Asian qualifications for admission.</p>

22

<p>Also, bluebayou, the numbers available through the links that I posted are for people of Asian heritage in general. “Asian” includes anything from Afghanistan to Syria to Uzbekistan to South Korea. East Asians, who are the ones most subject to admissions “caps”, are not broken out in those numbers. I would guess that East Asian LSAT scores are higher than “Asian” scores overall.</p>

23

<p>If anyone wants stats on affirmative action in law schools and legal hiring, you can slog through the 200-page US Commission on Civil Rights report. The gist of it is that there are about twenty or thirty African-American law school applicants, every year, who have the GPA/LSAT combo to get into the T14. The T14, faced with this pipeline problem, takes minority law students who would otherwise be anywhere in the first three tiers of law schools. Half of black law students wind up in the bottom 10% of their class at the end of the first year.</p>

<p>Basic common sense tells us that what one sees at Harvard is not indicative of what happens at the other 190+ law schools that are not named “Harvard” nor ranked above it in the US News.</p>

<p>(For the record, my ideal world would use affirmative action at the top schools, then let the chips fall where they may at lower-tier law schools.)</p>

24

<p>“Half of black law students wind up in the bottom 10% of their class at the end of the first year.”</p>

<p>This is correct. And it is true across law school tiers, though probably a lot less true at HYS, which collectively take more or less all of the black candidates with T14 numbers.</p>

25

<p>HappyAlumnus,</p>

<p>Not related to the admission to a top law school per se, but related to the admission to med school:</p>

<p>I once read from somewhere (likely SDN) back in 2010:</p>

<p>Asians make up 4.5% of the United States (~14 million).</p>

<p>~17,000 of the active 79,000 medical students are Asian, which is 21.5%.</p>

<p>MCAT guy, 12.05.10</p>

<ul>
<li>See more at: <a href=“is it true that asians are expected to get a higher MCAT score? | Student Doctor Network”>is it true that asians are expected to get a higher MCAT score? | Student Doctor Network;
</ul>

<p>I personally do not know whether it is true though. But it appears the absolute number of them scoring very high on MCAT seems to be high (likely in order to compensate for their real or perceived weakness in other soft qualifications, e.g., few could get a boost because of their achievement in major sports, which is highly valued in this society.)</p>

26

<p>@mcat2 would you say law school is largely a financial drain unless you are in a L14 school (and even then you have to be in the top 10-20%)?</p>

27

<p>

Just thought of this: The percentage 21.5% is actually higher than the percentage of matriculants to Ivy colleges in general. It likely means that the non-EC aspects of the qualification may carry more weight in the med school admission cycle than in the (Ivy league) college admission cycle. Maybe it is because MCAT’s ceiling is not intentionally kept as low as SAT so med schools do not use it as a screening device only.</p>

<p>I am not an expert about law school admissions but I would guess that the same can be said for LSAT (higher ceiling) vs SAT (lower ceiling.)</p>

28

<p>It’s a drain all right, even if you graduate from top law schools like Yale. My sisters roommate worked at a law firm in century city in la back in the 80s before the law bust, she already said lawyers from Yale were doing research in the back room if they were not one of the rainmakers. </p>

29

<p>@DrGoogle was she in the bottom 50% of the class?</p>

30

<p>Who knows she was already hired.</p>

31

<p>Almost all law schools are not worth the money (those with LRAPs aside). The rule of thumb is that you should only borrow what your first year salary is; if you can expect to make $150,000 your first year (and every subsequent year) the absolute max you should borrow is $150,000.</p>

<p>The T14 all cost about $250,000. Not worth it. The long term structural instability of the legal profession isn’t going to change, and even if you hit a great job your first year out, you’re only going to keep it for an average of three or four years. </p>

32

<p>Almost all law schools are not worth the money (those with LRAPs aside). The rule of thumb is that you should only borrow what your first year salary is; if you can expect to make $150,000 your first year (and every subsequent year) the absolute max you should borrow is $150,000.</p>

<p>The T14 all cost about $250,000. Not worth it. The long term structural instability of the legal profession isn’t going to change, and even if you hit a great job your first year out, you’re only going to keep it for an average of three or four years. </p>

33

<p>@ariesathena why are law jobs not reliable long-term?</p>

34

<p>The vast majority of associates do not make partner. (The statistic I heard on one of the best law firms in the country is that the average first-year associate lasts eighteen months.) They then have options, such as going in house, starting their own firms, or joining a smaller firm, but those almost all involve a pay cut to a salary level that simply does not justify a quarter million dollars in student loan debt.</p>

<p>Back in the day, a kid with a hundred grand in student loan debt could have the majority of that sucker knocked off after two or three years in BigLaw; whatever happened after that didn’t much matter in terms of making loan payments while also trying to save money, buy a house, put braces on the kids’ teeth, and build a life. </p>

35

<p>

</p>

<p>Only those attending the T5 should expect to make Big Law. All others are fools if they go in with that expectation bcos the odds are that a third to a half of the rest the T14 will not be making bank.</p>

<p>Statistics would suggest to multiply the odds of Big Law against the “expected salary” and THEN compare that to loan balances.</p>

36

<p>For concerns about associates in big law firms not lasting long: they don’t, but within your first 7-8 years out of school, you can easily bounce between big law firms, and the big law firm salary can last at least 7-8 years unless you get laid off or make an affirmative decision to exit big law firms. At that point, you can often go in-house for a salary that is comparable to a big law firm salary, or you can become a partner at a smaller firm and make a partner salary there that at least equals the associate salary in a big law firm.</p>

<p>So in short: there are plenty of ways to extend large law firm-type salaries for 7-8+ years. I sure did, for 10+ years.</p>

37

<p>10+ years ago was by definition not in this economy. Who cares how it worked pre-recession?</p>

38

<p>Demosthenes, you are wrong.</p>

<p>I stated that I “extend[ed] large law firm-type salaries…for 10+ years.” Not “10+ years ago”. My experience could well have started in 2003, extending large law firm-type salaries until 2014.</p>

<p>If you don’t care, why bother to respond to the post? </p>

39

<p>So your experience could have started pre-this economy? That’s supposed to make it a better analogy to today?</p>

40

<p>Demosthenes, too late to pretend as though you didn’t misunderstand my post. You’re still wrong.</p>

<p>You stated that my experience was 10+ years “ago”. That’s not at all what I stated. I stated that my experience lasted “for 10+ years”. That period, for all you know, could have ended last week. Even if it started in 2003, 5 years of the 10+ years could well have been post-2008 crash. That is certainly experience in “this economy”.</p>

<p>Go on if you want, but you did not read carefully, and your math doesn’t add up even if you did. Lawyers must read carefully and think with precision; you did not.</p>