Advice to a friend
Today I had a great night out with my friends. Some of 'em were my former LSAT students.
One of 'em is struggling with an issue, to which I tried to give the best advice I can give. I thought I'd pose the issue to my fellow bloggers and see if I can get your input.
This former student (we'll call him J) is deciding between two schools: 4th tier school in S. California (his home) and a 3rd tier school in Michigan. He wants to eventually practice law in California (Orange County).
Given his two choices and preference, I advised him to attend the California school. There is no significant difference between a 3rd and 4th tier school. At the regional level, solid networking will take students further than school name/prestige. His only reason for wanting the Michigan school is its higher ranking in US News World Report, while his reasons for wanting the California school include proximity to the city, in which he will eventually practice law, and the already established networks with family and friends in the California legal industry.
What say you? Did I give him good advice?
posted by Mystery @ 1:45 AM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Yes, you gave him good advice. Outside of T-14 and T-1, there really isn't much of an advantage solely based on rank in my opinion. The California location being his desired place to work hands down makes it a better place to go to school in. Networking and getting local jobs while in school will go far further than T3 to T4 comparisons.
I kind of wonder if someone, who would be ready to make a decision based on trvial differences in USNews, has any clue what the practice or study of law is like. Surely, great and talented lawyers come out of the so-called 4th tier, but this kind of judgment makes me questions the appropriateness of this whole endeavour for this person.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home