NY or DC for IP? Bad school options?? Forum

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
Post Reply
LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:25 pm

Hello. Been lurking on these forums for awhile and now looking for advice.

First, let's get my numbers out of the way:
LSAT: 162, 164. Another retake is NOT AN OPTION FOR ME (due to my age/phase in life and other factors)
GPA: 3.3 (with addendum, didn't seem to affect admissions)

I am a 29-year-old woman with a BS in a social science but enough credits in hard science that I could become patent bar eligible if I take only 3 more Bio classes at my local community college (which I can do this summer). I'm interested in patent prosecution because of the ability to apply my science interest while making good money and avoiding the crazy hours normally associated with BigLaw.

Other than that, I'm not really sure what specialty I would enjoy and I'm also not too interested in BigLaw other than patents because at this point in my life, I'm adverse to working 70-80 hour workweeks.

I'm afraid to take out more than 50K in debt for total COA (with a possible tolerance for up to 100K total COA at a good school)

I'm from the NYC area but I'm not sure whether I want to live and work there. Part of me wants to go down south/DC esp bc of the proximity to USPTO but I also don't want to look a gift horse in the mouth as I realize that I am very blessed to grow up in the law epicenter (NYC) and would be able to live with my parents during school, saving COL.

Here are my top considerations thus far:

-Hofstra for free (full tuition scholarship, live with parents)
-Brooklyn w/ 76% scholarship ( tuition = about 40K for me, plus books/fees/interest, live with parents)
-Washington & Lee w/ 73% scholarship (tuition+COL =100K)
-George Mason w/ 70% scholarship (Would pay like 38K tuition at out of state. Did not calculate in-state and don't know how easy/hard it would be to obtain. Did not calc COL but heard that it varies depending on the area.)
-Boston College at sticker (LOL not really an option for me)
-Still waiting to hear back from William and Mary!!??

I'm leaning towards either Gmu or W&L if I decide to go for the DC market, but I suspect either option will cost over 100K for total COA so I'm not sure if it's worth it. Does it matter that I'm going for patent law? Do I have a good shot at landing a decent-paying patent prosecution job from these schools?

Or should I just live with my parents and go for the NY market and try to make it work with Brooklyn or Hofstra?

Keep in mind that I am a very diligent and quick-learning student with very little need for a social life so I anticipate that I will graduate at the top of my class (top 10-20%) but I've never been to law school and I know the grading can be subjective so I don't want to take anything for granted.

In terms of LSAT retake/waiting for next cycle, I am really not willing to do that at my age/at this point. At the same time, I realize that I may not have the best options on the table and I don't want to do something stupid and take out loans I can't pay back.

I'm also waiting to hear back from a higher ranked school (in T20) so if they accept me, that may change my fate.

Thank you so much for any and all comments!

User avatar
cavalier1138

Moderator
Posts: 8007
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by cavalier1138 » Wed Mar 20, 2019 4:50 pm

Your school options are not great at the moment. I'd retake until you could work W&L up to a full ride. To respond to your two assertions about why there's no need to retake:

1. You're not too old.

2. I don't care how diligent you are. You cannot predict your class rank in law school. Going anywhere anticipating top 20% is a recipe for disappointment.

heartlessjester

New
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:02 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by heartlessjester » Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:17 am

LostGirl90 wrote:
I am a 29-year-old woman with a BS in a social science but enough credits in hard science that I could become patent bar eligible if I take only 3 more Bio classes at my local community college (which I can do this summer). I'm interested in patent prosecution because of the ability to apply my science interest while making good money and avoiding the crazy hours normally associated with BigLaw.

Other than that, I'm not really sure what specialty I would enjoy and I'm also not too interested in BigLaw other than patents because at this point in my life, I'm adverse to working 70-80 hour workweeks.

Does it matter that I'm going for patent law? Do I have a good shot at landing a decent-paying patent prosecution job from these schools?
This whole thread is kind of cringeworthy..... I'm going to be brutally honest with you. Your chance of patent prosecution is 0 even if you get patent bar eligible. Patent bar eligibility is the bare minumum for patent prosecution, firms won't hire you for it unless you have an undergrad EECS degree or a lifesciences graduate degree. Getting a patent pros gig with real STEM degrees is impossibly hard without the exact degree/experience type they are looking for much less a Cat B Social Science major. You would have to get a second bachelors or do a masters at the very least for a chance at prosecution. Don't go to law school if your goal is patent prosecution, it isn't happening unless you get a far stronger background. Even if you get it, it isn't as cushy as you seem to believe, do not go to law school expecting anything short of 80 hour weeks. You are 29, stop speaking about your age as though you are in your 60s.

PanjandrumOfReason

New
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 3:35 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by PanjandrumOfReason » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:40 am

My understanding is that for the engineering and computer science areas, firms are looking for their patent attorneys to have MS degrees, and for the hard sciences (biology, chemistry, and physics), firms are looking for their patent attorneys to have PhD degrees. My understanding is also that patent attorneys do typically work 60+ hour weeks for their impressive salaries.

Your post indicates that you have an interest in science but doesn't seem to anywhere indicate an interest in the practice of law, but only an interest in the salary associated with law. Have you, by any chance, considered medicine? After completing the requirements (medical school and residency), doctors are pretty much guaranteed $150K-$300K STARTING salaries regardless of what medical school they went to and what grades they achieved. Further, they can - depending on specialty - do this with regular 40 hour weeks. This is all in direct opposition to law, where getting high salaries basically requires either attending a top school or being at the top of the class, as well as 70+ hour weeks. And, quite frankly, doctors garner infinitely more respect than lawyers. The downsides are that it is much more difficult to get into a medical school to begin with, and, after that, 4 years of med school and 4 years of residency are required - as opposed to just 3 total years of law school.

I, personally, would not take out loans in your position (but I am admittedly very debt averse). If you are insistent on law school, my vote goes to Hofstra (or retake for better scholarship options) here.

miskellyjohnson

New
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:10 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by miskellyjohnson » Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:01 pm

heartlessjester wrote: firms won't hire you for it unless you have an undergrad EECS degree or a lifesciences graduate degree. Getting a patent pros gig with real STEM degrees is impossibly hard without the exact degree/experience type they are looking for
This is definitely not true. There are tons of mechanical engineers, chemical engineers, biomed engineers, materials engineers, etc. that work in firms doing patent prosecution, including biglaw firms. EE is certainly the most in demand (of the engineering), followed by CS (although that could change quickly with one SCOTUS decision). But it is not all that difficult, with decent grades and prestige (both UG and law school), to find a prosecution job with other engineering backgrounds.

Edited to add: Although, you are correct, nobody is likely to hire a social science major with a few science credits.
Last edited by QContinuum on Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed quote formatting.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:15 pm

Damn. Thanks for all the honest replies!

In terms of retaking, part of my reason against it is moderate psychological trauma/distress associated with the whole thing...the first time I took the test, I definitely didn't give myself enough time to study (was working at the time) and was also going through a personal issue very close to the test and that's why I ended up with a 162. Even with acknowledging these facts, this score was so devastating to me that I found it almost impossible to study for the retake in the beginning although I was able to make substantive gains/learned new techniques for logic games and reading comp...during home tests (timed), I was consistently getting high 160's and I even got a 170 once. The lowest score I got at home during this time was 166. So the 164 result for the second take was shocking and disappointing as well so I kinda just feel defeated about the whole thing and that I just don't have the nerves, speed, physical control (bladder, eating, drinking etc.) to do any better, despite having the technical skill/intelligence to do well in terms of actually answering the questions correctly.

In terms of my age, I know that I'm not old, but I would like to get married and have kids before its too late so I don't want to delay the whole "career" thing any further. I don't have a partner right now so the plan is kinda to get a job/career going so that I could at least move out of my parents house and be a functional adult before I meet someone but that may never happen either so I don't want to base my life around that but I also don't want to choose a life path (take out 100's of thousands in loans, be tied to 80 hour workweeks for 10 or more years) that would PRECLUDE that.
I'm also not someone looking for easy money btw.... I'm actually a workaholic and if I was 22 I would jump at the chance to slave away in intellectual nonsense for years on end.

I actually am very interested in the law. I didn't want to ID myself too much but I kinda don't even care at this point...A few years ago I took a paralegal course at my local college b/c of a suggestion of a friend and a desire to use a quick/cheap education to get a decent job and finally move out. Ended up being at the tip top of my class with all my profs telling me I should go to law school. (I also really loved legal research and applying facts to law/strategy/stuff paras don't usually do)Planned on working as a Para for a few years to save money before law school but once I got a Para job I saw how clerical it was and hated it. So I decided to go straight to law school.

At this point I will prob just go to Hofstra and grad at top of my class and try to get into a mid)size firm doing something. Thank you all for the IP reality check!!

QContinuum

Moderator
Posts: 3594
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by QContinuum » Thu Mar 21, 2019 1:49 pm

miskellyjohnson wrote:
heartlessjester wrote: firms won't hire you for it unless you have an undergrad EECS degree or a lifesciences graduate degree. Getting a patent pros gig with real STEM degrees is impossibly hard without the exact degree/experience type they are looking for
This is definitely not true. There are tons of mechanical engineers, chemical engineers, biomed engineers, materials engineers, etc. that work in firms doing patent prosecution, including biglaw firms. EE is certainly the most in demand (of the engineering), followed by CS (although that could change quickly with one SCOTUS decision). But it is not all that difficult, with decent grades and prestige (both UG and law school), to find a prosecution job with other engineering backgrounds.

Edited to add: Although, you are correct, nobody is likely to hire a social science major with a few science credits.
miskelly is right. (heartless has a bit of an unwarranted fixation with the value of his/her EECS degree. Definitely not true that law firms only want EECS prosecutors.)

What's required for patent prosecution is an engineering Bachelor's, plus (at least) 1-2 years' full-time work experience in the field (optionally substituted for by a Master's, but firms prefer the work experience to the Master's), or a science Ph.D. Even a science Master's generally won't cut it. A social science degree with the bare minimum of science/engineering credits needed to confer patent bar eligibility most certainly won't cut it.

Now, OP's patent bar eligibility would come in very useful for patent litigation. But to get a decent shot at litigation positions, she would need to get into a much better law school, i.e., a T13/T20, or at least a strong T1 like Fordham. Hofstra and Brooklyn won't cut it.
PanjandrumOfReason wrote:Your post indicates that you have an interest in science but doesn't seem to anywhere indicate an interest in the practice of law, but only an interest in the salary associated with law. Have you, by any chance, considered medicine? After completing the requirements (medical school and residency), doctors are pretty much guaranteed $150K-$300K STARTING salaries regardless of what medical school they went to and what grades they achieved. Further, they can - depending on specialty - do this with regular 40 hour weeks. This is all in direct opposition to law, where getting high salaries basically requires either attending a top school or being at the top of the class, as well as 70+ hour weeks. And, quite frankly, doctors garner infinitely more respect than lawyers. The downsides are that it is much more difficult to get into a medical school to begin with, and, after that, 4 years of med school and 4 years of residency are required - as opposed to just 3 total years of law school.
Panjandrum is also right to pick up on OP's seeming lack of interest in actually being a lawyer (aside from the salary). I fear she'll be in for a miserable ride if she pursues law school solely for the salary. And worst of all, aside from the general stress and disadvantages of the BigLaw "lifestyle," the schools OP's considering won't even get her one of those high-paying positions. Out of Hofstra and Brooklyn, graduates struggle to land low/mid five figure legal positions.
LostGirl90 wrote:In terms of retaking, part of my reason against it is moderate psychological trauma/distress associated with the whole thing...the first time I took the test, I definitely didn't give myself enough time to study (was working at the time) and was also going through a personal issue very close to the test and that's why I ended up with a 162. Even with acknowledging these facts, this score was so devastating to me that I found it almost impossible to study for the retake in the beginning although I was able to make substantive gains/learned new techniques for logic games and reading comp...during home tests (timed), I was consistently getting high 160's and I even got a 170 once. The lowest score I got at home during this time was 166. So the 164 result for the second take was shocking and disappointing as well so I kinda just feel defeated about the whole thing and that I just don't have the nerves, speed, physical control (bladder, eating, drinking etc.) to do any better, despite having the technical skill/intelligence to do well in terms of actually answering the questions correctly.
I hate to say this, and I really don't mean to be cruel, but if the LSAT was that traumatizing to you, I really don't think you're cut out to be a lawyer. How will you survive law school finals? The bar exam? I assure you those tests are infinitely more difficult and traumatizing than the LSAT, especially because the consequences of poor performance are so much more severe and irreparable. Bomb the LSAT? Just take it again - law school's not going anywhere. Bomb a 1L law school final? Especially at a school like Hofstra or Brooklyn, wave goodbye to any prospect of a lucrative career. You can't "redo" 1L for a better GPA/class rank. Flunk the bar? You might get one more try, but if you fail twice you will certainly be fired.
LostGirl90 wrote:In terms of my age, I know that I'm not old, but I would like to get married and have kids before its too late so I don't want to delay the whole "career" thing any further. I don't have a partner right now so the plan is kinda to get a job/career going so that I could at least move out of my parents house and be a functional adult before I meet someone but that may never happen either so I don't want to base my life around that but I also don't want to choose a life path (take out 100's of thousands in loans, be tied to 80 hour workweeks for 10 or more years) that would PRECLUDE that.
One, living with your parents does not preclude dating.

Two, not having a job does not preclude dating.

Three, law school - and becoming a lawyer - will not help you find a partner. To the contrary, it will actively hurt your chances. Law school isn't particularly conducive to dating, and working in BigLaw is even worse. Do you know what's one of the top topics of worry/discussion amongst single female BigLawyers? Whether and when to pursue egg freezing, because there's no time to date, no partner on the horizon, and the biological clock is about to run out.

Four, the way to move out of your parents' house is to simply pack up and move out. You don't need to go to law school as a reason or excuse to move out. You're 29! You can move out whenever you please.

LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:13 pm

QContinuum:

I'm not interested in patent litigation or any type of litigation (unless it's in some speciality or other situation (maybe a small law firm??) that would change the hours demand) specifically because I don't want to work 80-hour weeks.

I'm not into a law career solely for the money. I have a natural aptitude and interest in arguments, logic, reading, writing etc. that I would like to apply to SOME career. I had an inclination to go to law school specifically because I did so well in and enjoyed the law classes (legal research & writing, torts law, etc.) that I took while in the Paralegal program that I went through.

Yeah I've definitely went down the thought path of "Well if the LSAT was so stressful, how can I handle law finals/bar exam?" But the thing is, I have never experienced text anxiety before. I have taken very difficult classes in hard sciences and other challenging areas and have NEVER had any type of nervousness before or during the test. My test performance has always reflected my knowledge.
I think the reason why the LSAT was different for me is that it's a "speeded up" test and that really got to me psychologically. In college, you are always given enough time on the test to do well if you know the material. Are law school final exams "sped up" in this way where it's designed so that most people cannot answer all the questions correctly in the time allotted (like the LSAT) or is it like a college exam where the timing is somewhat reasonable? What about the bar? (I would think that these tests actually want to test your KNOWLEDGE of the material and not your ability rush through it??)

I'm not trying to go to law school to find a husband, although I know that it's not impossible. Like, mainly where I am in life is I want to get married within 3-5 years but I also know that in today's economy, a 1-working-parent household usually isn't viable so I need a halfway decent job secured (50K or whatever, I really don't care about money) so that, with my husband, we can raise kids and not be living in poverty. Also, I'm aware that NY sucks as far as living costs are concerned but it looks like I don't have many options. I also got into Vermont and Maine with substantial scholly's that I can negotiate to full, but that would involve more moving/living costs and idk if life there is that much more affordable. (I also applied to Kentucky but haven't heard back from them. If they offer $$$ that's also an option I guess) I'm also really smart (or so I thought) and I feel like I should have a job where I get to use my brain but maybe that's just part of the lofty bs they teach you in college to "follow your dreams" and "you're special" and whatever. I know I'm not special. I just want a halfway decent job with benefits that I don't totally hate (and ideally get to use my brain) and I also don't want to die alone without ever having kids lol. That's all I need out of life.

User avatar
cavalier1138

Moderator
Posts: 8007
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by cavalier1138 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:26 pm

And I thought the first post raised some red flags...
LostGirl90 wrote:I'm not interested in patent litigation or any type of litigation (unless it's in some speciality or other situation (maybe a small law firm??) that would change the hours demand) specifically because I don't want to work 80-hour weeks.
That's not really a function of working in litigation. It has far more to do with the type of firm or organization you work for.
LostGirl90 wrote:Are law school final exams "sped up" in this way where it's designed so that most people cannot answer all the questions correctly in the time allotted (like the LSAT) or is it like a college exam where the timing is somewhat reasonable?
Depends on the professor, but "racehorse exams" are extremely common. And the essay portion of the bar is known for being a race against time.
LostGirl90 wrote:I'm not trying to go to law school to find a husband, although I know that it's not impossible. Like, mainly where I am in life is I want to get married within 3-5 years but I also know that in today's economy, a 1-working-parent household usually isn't viable so I need a halfway decent job secured (50K or whatever, I really don't care about money) so that, with my husband, we can raise kids and not be living in poverty.
Just... don't think about that as something related to law school. Go to law school if, and only if, you want to be a lawyer. Don't go because you think it's going to pay well. Don't go because you liked a couple of law courses you took before. You need to want to practice law, full stop.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


QContinuum

Moderator
Posts: 3594
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by QContinuum » Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:39 pm

OP: The type of legal position you want, with reasonable 9-6/9-7 hours and decent pay, is basically limited to BigFed. (We've already covered above why patent prosecution isn't going to be an option for you.) To land BigFed, you will need to go to a T13. To go to a T13, you will need a better LSAT score.
LostGirl90 wrote:I think the reason why the LSAT was different for me is that it's a "speeded up" test and that really got to me psychologically. In college, you are always given enough time on the test to do well if you know the material. Are law school final exams "sped up" in this way where it's designed so that most people cannot answer all the questions correctly in the time allotted (like the LSAT) or is it like a college exam where the timing is somewhat reasonable? What about the bar? (I would think that these tests actually want to test your KNOWLEDGE of the material and not your ability rush through it??)
Unfortunately, legal exams are almost invariably "speeded up" tests where it's a mad race against the clock. Most of my law school finals were far worse than the LSAT, frankly, in terms of being a race against the clock. Certainly all of my 1L exams were that way. It's pretty rare to have a law school final with no/minimal time pressure.

LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:50 pm

QContinuum wrote:OP: The type of legal position you want, with reasonable 9-6/9-7 hours and decent pay, is basically limited to BigFed. (We've already covered above why patent prosecution isn't going to be an option for you.) To land BigFed, you will need to go to a T13. To go to a T13, you will need a better LSAT score.
LostGirl90 wrote:I think the reason why the LSAT was different for me is that it's a "speeded up" test and that really got to me psychologically. In college, you are always given enough time on the test to do well if you know the material. Are law school final exams "sped up" in this way where it's designed so that most people cannot answer all the questions correctly in the time allotted (like the LSAT) or is it like a college exam where the timing is somewhat reasonable? What about the bar? (I would think that these tests actually want to test your KNOWLEDGE of the material and not your ability rush through it??)
Unfortunately, legal exams are almost invariably "speeded up" tests where it's a mad race against the clock. Most of my law school finals were far worse than the LSAT, frankly, in terms of being a race against the clock. Certainly all of my 1L exams were that way. It's pretty rare to have a law school final with no/minimal time pressure.
Right, but based on what I've read, the task is to get as many RELEVANT points in on the issue/argument as possible in the time allotted, and that it's not necessarily true that the students who write the most get the highest grade. This is different than the LSAT, where there is a set number of questions that all take a certain amount of time to answer.

LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:13 pm

Cavalier1138:

"That's not really a function of working in litigation. It has far more to do with the type of firm or organization you work for." Please elaborate!



"Just... don't think about that as something related to law school. Go to law school if, and only if, you want to be a lawyer. Don't go because you think it's going to pay well. Don't go because you liked a couple of law courses you took before. You need to want to practice law, full stop."

Yes, I totally agree. I've just been having a hard time figuring that out, especially since "practicing law" can mean a lot of different things depending on specialty, firm, etc. I've kinda used that fact to comfort myself in the beginning of the process, telling myself that the field is so diverse, I'm bound to find SOMETHING I like or that I'm okay with doing. But, the more I read, the more I realize that things aren't so flexible and it may be important to know what kind of field/practice you want to go into before choosing your school and even before taking the LSAT (since in many cases, LSAT=school choice=career prospects). Besides relying on my experiences in my law classes (LOVED legal research and writing, LOVED Torts, hated Property, was okay with Family law), what would you suggest as a resource for me to discover whether I want to practice law and what field I would like to go into?


While I'm here, I'd also like to say that, based on what I've read of the job description, I think I would really enjoy long-term clerking for a judge. I know that FEDERAL clerkships are limited to top schools and that most clerkships are only for a year or two but I was wondering how hard it would be for me as a Hofstra Law grad (feel free to comment on average Hofstra grad vs. top of class Hofstra grad if that makes a difference) in terms of getting a permanent/long-term/senior clerk job. I would be willing to work for ANY court at basically any pay (based on what I've read, the bottom is like 50K which I'm okay with).

My takeaway is that I need to do a lot more research on lawyer jobs/the legal industry. In terms of Hofstra, I don't really see it as much of a risk. I would pay no tuition and no COL (live with parents), I guess I would pay about $5,000-ish dollars for fees and books (still need to run the hard numbers on this). This is less than what I paid for my Paralegal certificate so I don't think it's a bad gamble, even if I end up with a "bad" 50K job at a small firm. I still need to do my research on this whole thing, but right now I feel like Hofstra isn't a bad idea from where I'm standing.

Thank you ALL so much for the reality check on Patent Prosecution and other law jobs. Basically most of my fears about taking this plunge and taking loans with the schools I have right now have been confirmed and it's a bit sobering but I'm glad I'm finding out these facts now and not later after I've taken out 100K or even 50K with limited means of paying it back.

heartlessjester

New
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 5:02 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by heartlessjester » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:22 pm

LostGirl90 wrote:
QContinuum wrote:OP: The type of legal position you want, with reasonable 9-6/9-7 hours and decent pay, is basically limited to BigFed. (We've already covered above why patent prosecution isn't going to be an option for you.) To land BigFed, you will need to go to a T13. To go to a T13, you will need a better LSAT score.
LostGirl90 wrote:I think the reason why the LSAT was different for me is that it's a "speeded up" test and that really got to me psychologically. In college, you are always given enough time on the test to do well if you know the material. Are law school final exams "sped up" in this way where it's designed so that most people cannot answer all the questions correctly in the time allotted (like the LSAT) or is it like a college exam where the timing is somewhat reasonable? What about the bar? (I would think that these tests actually want to test your KNOWLEDGE of the material and not your ability rush through it??)
Unfortunately, legal exams are almost invariably "speeded up" tests where it's a mad race against the clock. Most of my law school finals were far worse than the LSAT, frankly, in terms of being a race against the clock. Certainly all of my 1L exams were that way. It's pretty rare to have a law school final with no/minimal time pressure.
Right, but based on what I've read, the task is to get as many RELEVANT points in on the issue/argument as possible in the time allotted, and that it's not necessarily true that the students who write the most get the highest grade. This is different than the LSAT, where there is a set number of questions that all take a certain amount of time to answer.
Careful, exams are kind of random. What is "relevant" is sometimes very arbitrary. I've had profs mark of for the smallest most immaterial things. For instance, you can say the something like X is in the system's interest because the witnesses are in that state and lose points for saying witnesses instead of who the witness actually is which most people wouldn't consider relevant. Depends on the professor, what they think is important and your class. If the curve becomes close enough grafing becomes even more arbitrary to force a curve. Some profs give almost no feedback/stats for exams so you may also never know how off you were from an a/where you went wrong. Test timing is very prof dependent too, I've had exams where everyone is working yill the last second and still wants more time and one where everyone was done an hour early. Tbh your prof could do w/e they feel like doing as long as it isn't against school policy.


On the LSAT, doing worse on the real thing is not that surprising. The real thing is more stressful for one. Practice tests are also from previous years and the consensus is that the LSAT has gotten somewhat harder over time, it is more difficult to score as high on some of the newer ones. My real score to practice test differce was worse than yours (though I had a few rather unfortunate coincidental reasons that probably accentuated the difference).

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:27 pm

UPDATE: Boston College just emailed me with a $51,000 (I guess almost 1/3 tuition) scholarship. Does that change anything regarding my ability to negotiate the offers with the other schools I've been accepted to?

To recap, the offers I was considering (besides Hofstra for full tuition scholarship) were:

-Brooklyn Law 76% scholarship ($129,000)
-Washington & Lee 76% scholarship ($112,500)
-George Mason w/ 70% scholarship (out of state) ($84,000)

LostGirl90

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:51 am

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by LostGirl90 » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:51 pm

One more post then I'm going to bed :P

In terms of law exams being a "race against time", yeah that kinda terrifies me in the context of the LSAT but I definitely perceive the problem to be psychological in nature rather than an actual mental/intellectual problem that I have (lack of ability to think quickly or even to perform under pressure). In other situations (esp academic-related), I am very good at thinking on my feet and shining through in high-pressure situations. Part of me wants to go back and "slay" the LSAT beast and thereby "prove" that I can be competent in law school. But I already know that I can be. It's just a confidence/psychological thing.

The reason why I don't want to take the LSAT again is less of a general aversion to time pressure than it is of going through the trauma of "facing my failure"- which is what I went through the second time I studied for/took the test. I have a very strong Type A/obsessive/anxiety/self-critical personality and I just don't feel like pressing those buttons and torturing myself over and over again. Like, I got a 90th percentile LSAT score. I got a free ride to Hofstra. At this point, I just want to move on and make the best of the situation. :)

User avatar
cavalier1138

Moderator
Posts: 8007
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by cavalier1138 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 6:35 am

LostGirl90 wrote:"That's not really a function of working in litigation. It has far more to do with the type of firm or organization you work for." Please elaborate!
The number of hours you put in for a given week is going to be a function of where you're working. There are DOJ attorneys who put in 80 hour weeks, because they're spending 4-6 weeks embedded with an USAO, providing support for a trial in a specialized area. There are corporate attorneys who pull weeks in excess of 80 hours during a major deal for a client in Southeast Asia. There are litigation associates at big firms who routinely go home at 6:00 if they aren't preparing for trial, and there are solo practitioners who work all day every day to satisfy their client list.
LostGirl90 wrote:what would you suggest as a resource for me to discover whether I want to practice law and what field I would like to go into?
You're a paralegal, right? Talk to lawyers. Ask them about practice. You don't need to figure out exactly which specialty area you like. But you need to develop a realistic view of the profession and of law school before you commit to it. And you need to want to be an attorney. I can't stress that part enough. You cannot go to law school and hope you really enjoy practicing (which has very little to do with whether you like law classes).
LostGirl90 wrote:I know that FEDERAL clerkships are limited to top schools and that most clerkships are only for a year or two but I was wondering how hard it would be for me as a Hofstra Law grad (feel free to comment on average Hofstra grad vs. top of class Hofstra grad if that makes a difference) in terms of getting a permanent/long-term/senior clerk job.
Lifetime clerkships are very difficult to secure, because you need to come on with the right judge at the right time to be in a position for that to be realistic. In terms of your chances from Hofstra: that school doesn't have a good track record with clerkships, even at the state level (probably because NY is a competitive state for clerking). The difference between a Hofstra grad at median vs. a Hofstra grad at the top of the class is stop trying to predict your law school performance. Assume you'll be median, and plan accordingly. In which case, Hofstra is not a "risk-free" proposition. You have a 25% chance (or worse, based on prior years' data) chance of not being employed as a lawyer after graduation.

beinghuman

Moderator
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 5:10 pm

Re: NY or DC for IP? Bad school options??

Post by beinghuman » Thu Mar 28, 2019 6:05 pm

You seem really keen on attending law school this year. And I suspect any warning advice you receive, you will rationalize it to reach the conclusion you want. I am not insulting you but the way you have been responding to comments indicates that you are convinced that you will do fine - which I hope you do.
But being in the LSAT's 90th percentile is no guarantee that you will be on top in law school. For example, in my 1L year, people who were admitted off the waitlist (no scholarship and lower LSAT scores) did much better on finals than people with very high LSAT scores and generous scholarships.

Why will your confidence serve you better in law school than on the LSAT? Almost everyone in law school has a strong type A personality. You'd be surprised as to how similar to you your colleagues will be.

The reality of the market is that one needs to attend an at least T20 to have a shot and even then a lot of people struggle, the lower the school.
Some doors will simply be closed to the schools you are considering. I know several firms or government agencies that simply would not invite applications from schools that are below the T13.

You can go to Hofstra on a full ride but if you do not end up in the top 20% -and I am being generous-, your chances at achieving your goals will be very slim. That is the danger with those schools.
LostGirl90 wrote:One more post then I'm going to bed :P

In terms of law exams being a "race against time", yeah that kinda terrifies me in the context of the LSAT but I definitely perceive the problem to be psychological in nature rather than an actual mental/intellectual problem that I have (lack of ability to think quickly or even to perform under pressure). In other situations (esp academic-related), I am very good at thinking on my feet and shining through in high-pressure situations. Part of me wants to go back and "slay" the LSAT beast and thereby "prove" that I can be competent in law school. But I already know that I can be. It's just a confidence/psychological thing.

The reason why I don't want to take the LSAT again is less of a general aversion to time pressure than it is of going through the trauma of "facing my failure"- which is what I went through the second time I studied for/took the test. I have a very strong Type A/obsessive/anxiety/self-critical personality and I just don't feel like pressing those buttons and torturing myself over and over again. Like, I got a 90th percentile LSAT score. I got a free ride to Hofstra. At this point, I just want to move on and make the best of the situation. :)

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Post Reply

Return to “Choosing a Law School”