Low GPA, decent LSAT, questions(and a little about running)

162 to 168 is quite a range. but a top 100 should be no problem. if you're closer to the mid/upper end of that range a top 50 shouldn't be a problem, either. you may not get into all the schools ranked that way but, if you apply to enough of them, you will get into some. it is very important that you go to the best school possible, especially if you're talking about schools ranked outside the top 30. the difference between a school ranked #38 and school ranked #58 is larger than you think.

and don't try to run for a school during law school. it seems pretty clear from your grades that you're not the best or most focused student. your first year grades are very, very important for your future employment. don't add something that would take time away from studying. i can't stress this point enough.

Today's Wall Street Journal has a very sobering article about employment after law school, in particular for students who don't go to the top schools or graudate at the top of their class.

I'm in the same boat. 3.15 GPA, decent practice LSATs and considering law school. Good luck to you!

What was your undergrad major?

I did politics. It isn't so much that I am a bad student, I finished real strong, my first two years were dealing with a lot of other stuff, injuries had me depressed, I boozed a lot, blew off classes to cross train. Dumb stuff. Is there a link to that Wall Street article? Might be a good read...

i think hilary bontz ran for georgetown as a law student (although i'm not sure where i saw that, but i remember thinking it was really impressive). she did pretty well for herself (made ncaas in the 1500, didn't make the final though)...she did better than she ever did while an undergrad at columbia.

Decent LSAT, Low GPA wrote:

I did politics. It isn't so much that I am a bad student, I finished real strong, my first two years were dealing with a lot of other stuff, injuries had me depressed, I boozed a lot, blew off classes to cross train. Dumb stuff. Is there a link to that Wall Street article? Might be a good read...

frankly, unless you're going to a top undergrad, 3.5 isn't "real strong," at least when compared to the people you're going to be competing with in law school.

and, yes, i very much recommend that WSJ article (or something like it). i didn't read the whole thing but anyone going to law school should be very much aware of what their true employment prospects are after graduation. everyone thinks they'll be at the top of their class and working for a big firm starting at $160K. don't fall into the same trap.

My mom went to law school for a year and hated it. She said it was completely worthless. She got an MBA and did alright with that. I've heard people say that law sucks your soul out of you. It seems like you need to be one of the really competitive types to succeed in it. Maybe some lawyers can chime in with the more pleasant aspects of working in this field?

I would strongly recommend against running for a team while in law school. You won't have time. Most law schools strongly discourage people from even working part time jobs their first year.

The first year of law school, particularly the first semester, is critical. Fair or not, the whole job situation is heavily weighted toward how you do your first year, paricularly firs semester. Job interviews for first years are typically in the spring, shortly after you get your first semester grades. If you did well, you will be far more likely to get a summer job, which will open the door to interviews for a permanent job. If you did poorly your first year, you won't get a summer job (unless you are at a top 10 school). Then, it is very hard to land a top job your second summer or after you graduate without good previous jobs.

Take two law school grads with identical grades at graduation. One did well his first semester and went down hill every semester after that. He may have multiple offers from premier firms. The other did poorly his first semester but he dug himself out of a hole and graduated with the same gpa. It will be much harder for him to find a job. Not fair, but that is the way it works.

Of course, if you are at a top 10 school, you can throw this all out the window. But a top 10 school is not an option for you.

All that being said, I still think you should go to the best school where you are admitted. Hopefully you can get into some in the top 40/50. You should not go a lesser school hoping to get better grades. Here's why I say this: A 3.1 in college suggests your law school grades won't be stellar. If you go to a marginally top 100 school and are above average, I think you are worse off than going to a top 40 school and being in the middle of the class.

Good luck.

foundit wrote:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119040786780835602.html?mod=hpp_us_pageone

So much for the ideal of noble service. "I am not making 100 large each year." Boohoohoo. "I can't live the lifestyle I thought because I have to make loan payments off of $50,000 year." Still making more than a good portion of the American population and definitely have more capability to increase in the future. Serves them right.

All hope is not lost, i was in a (somewhat) similar position as you. I had a 3.16 at the time off application, and a 3.23 at graduation. But, i managed a 174 on the LSAT. This is not likely for you, but not impossible since i never scored above a 170 on the practice tests. Study your ass, bc nothing will help you more than the LSAT, nothing.

I am actually a first year now at UPenn, and love it. I got lucky i guess.

My advice to you would be not to run in law school, but do something that sets you apart to help your GPA. If you really want that extra year of running, do a year Masters of Accounting (pretty easy my friend said), or a one year MPH, or something else BS like that. Also, if you dont get into any of your top realistic choices, consider working for a year or two.

hey chuck d, will you be the official letsrun.com pre-law advisor? i mean, i've already got one from college, but he doesn't know gebremariam from gebreselassie and probably can't really be trusted. what do you say?

so long as i have time, i'll weigh in on such threads.

That is good news. Do I remember correctly that you were once involved in admissions at an unnamed elite Chicago law school?

You're the law community's worst nightmare---you're an Underachiever (average to high test score, low gpa, posting inquiries on a jog site, c'mon)....you've shown evidence of that, you've admitted to it, you'll continue it even w/ a good gig... show me how you've changed and you've got a chance in my law practice

Forrest Tahdooahnippah (Stanford undergrad) is running for Minnesota this year while in law school. Just thought I might throw that out there.

...how I remember those halcyon days of yore. They sucked ass.

You sound like me: a smart guy (good LSAT), quasi-motivated undergraduate (although I somehow managed a 3.8), and generally more interested in enjoying my life and having fun than making a ton of money. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So do what I didn't: look before you leap. Take some time off from school to figure out what you're doing with your life before jumping into law school. Everything you hear about law school is true. Let me number them to emphasize how little you will enjoy this experience:

1. It is scandalously, exploitatively expensive. The amount of debt I have makes me sick to my stomach.

2. The professors, with very few exceptions, have no interest in teaching (especially at a top school like the one I went to). You're "taught" using the casebook method, which is a terrible way to learn anything, and generally nothing but a protacted exercise in hiding the ball. Studying using the casebooks is an extremely frustrating experience and I never got used to it. Class meanwhile is conducted in the Socratic method, which is intimidating and once again an exercise in hiding the ball for no good reason.

3. You are pitted against your fellow students. Because most schools grade on a fairly steep curve (only 20% get A's, typically), and because your GPA translates directly into the quality of job you will get, there is an intensely competitive atmosphere, and a social (or asocial?) hierarchy based on what kind of grades you got and whether you made Law Review.

4. You have to study your ass off to get good grades. There is no way around it. I may have been smarter than most of my fellow classmates by every other measure, but I generally got mediocre grades because I just couldn't put in the same hours in the library that they did. I didn't see the point in giving up my life like that.

So, don't be dumb. Rethink this law school thing. I made it through and I have a job I enjoy now (thankfully I'm not at a huge firm working 80 hours a week), but it was a harrowing experience. My boss, who went to law school 30 years ago, recalls the whole experience with such ire that he won't answer the phone when law schools call asking him to come to career fairs, etc. The whole law school system is exploitative and needlessly painful.

And by the way, Hiring Authority's an ***hole. You don't want to get hired by a sadistic jackass like that guy anyway. I bet I'm a better lawyer than him too.

foundit wrote:

My mom went to law school for a year and hated it. She said it was completely worthless. She got an MBA and did alright with that. I've heard people say that law sucks your soul out of you. It seems like you need to be one of the really competitive types to succeed in it. Maybe some lawyers can chime in with the more pleasant aspects of working in this field?

Oh, well if your mom thinks law school is worthless, maybe we should just abolish it all together!

Some people think medical school is too long and hard, investment banking makes you a whore and venture capital (my profession) means you are a heartless SOB who screws entrepeneurs for a living.

But some of us love those industries: for us your mom's, as nice as I'm sure she is, opinion on anything is worthless.