Having been through a few job interviews, both on the giving and receiving end, I'll offer this advice:  When asked to "Tell me about yourself," the one descriptor you don't want to use is, "I love working with people."  It's cliche and the truth is, there are days when it's a downright lie.  I suppose we all like to think we are "people persons".  But let's face it- there are people, and then there are people. 
    
Similarly, in a law school application, when asked "Why do you want to become a lawyer?", you probably shouldn't say, "Because I want to help people."  It's cliche and the truth is, it's not entirely true.  Certainly, you may want to help people.  But fast-food workers help people.  Sanitation workers help people.  Do they do these jobs because they want to help people?  I don't know, but I imagine there is a financial motivation in there somewhere. 

If you do anything solely for the money, you likely won't be happy.  Make no mistake about it; money is important.  We need it to live.  It pays for shelter, food and other stuff.  If we choose a career path solely for the money, we may initially be happy.  But eventually we will become dissatisfied.  Abraham Maslow predicted it.  He called the phenomenon "self-actualization."  Once we meet our basic needs in life, we seek to self-actualize.

And that brings me to the point.  A legal career can certainly be lucrative.  At the same time, the cost of entry can be quite steep.  Law school tuition has become notoriously costly.  The opportunity cost of foregoing employment for three years is expensive.  And the sheer investment of time, reading countless cases, preparing outlines, class time, study groups and the like are a huge investment.  And today, with the state of the "legal economy" and high lawyer unemployment, the return on investment may be quite low.  But there are still plenty of high paying legal jobs out there.  New graduates are earning well into the six figures and after practicing for a few years, can make more money than they ever thought possible.

But practicing law for the money is an exercise in futility.  The work is so demanding that doing it for money alone will quickly lead to career disatisfaction.

Instead, career satisfaction will result from becoming the best lawyer you can be.  You will derive great satisfaction from developing expertise in your practice area.  You will learn to rely upon a unique combination of research, collaboration, investigation, reasoning, anticipating future developments and the synthesis of all it into excellent legal advice.  And there is nothing more satisfying than providing the best possible legal advice that, yes, helps people.   

The irony of it is, that lawyers help people every day.  But law students who go into it  wanting "to help people" (in the idealistic sense) and end up in corporate law jobs will quickly become disaffected.  Sadly, in many cases, with student debt they don't really have a choice.  They have to take the high-paying big firm jobs.  I would argue however, that even in these jobs, they can help people.  They can help businesspeople solve problems.  They can help them resolve disputes.  Sure, it's not defending indigent clients, but it's still helping people.  In fact, I have yet to run into a legal position that did not require the lawyer to help someone.


So, if you want to be a lawyer, one way or the other, you are going to end up helping people.  It may not be exactly the kind of help you envisioned as an idealistic law student.  But it's still helping.  At its core, the practice of law is a service.  And if you do not have the heart of a servant, you will be unhappy in law practice.

I had a doctors appointment yesterday.  The doctor helped me in a way that no one else could.  He helped to solve my medical problem.  It was a pretty serious condition and I had been worried about.  As I left the office, I felt a sense of relief and gratitude.   And then it struck me.  

On the way to doctor's office, just before my appointment, I had returned the call of a businesperson.  She needed advice regarding business negotiations she was having that had stalled.  She was obviously frustrated and concerned that the project might not make it.  I asked her questions about the transaction.  She described the project.  I asked more questions.  She explained some of the points of contention between the parties.  In particular was the issue of the assumption of risk of certain elements of the transaction.  I suggested several different mechanisms by which the parties could assign that risk.  I could hear the "click" of the mental light bulb going off as she realized that these suggestions could effectively solve the impasse.  I could sense her relief that there was hope that the parties could find a middle ground.  Coming into the call, she was like I was going into the doctor's office.  She was concerned and perhaps had worried about the issue.  Going out of the call, she was like me leaving the doctor's office.  She was relieved and optimistic about a resolution.

Simply, and like my doctor, I had helped her in a way that no one else could.  And I took a great sense of satisfaction in that fact.  I hadn't  saved an innocent defendant from the death penalty.  But I had helped someone.  And as I thought about I realized that that is the point of the practice of law.  We're here to help people.  We do it every day.  It is not only unavoidable, it's the point of it all.  And  if helping people ceases to be our reason for practicing law, that is when we lose our way as lawyers.

Best wishes in your legal career.
 

At the risk of sounding cynical, I'd like to make the following observation.  One of the oldest sales tricks in the book is the "Tom Sawyer" tactic.  Tom Sawyer, you may recall, convinced his friends to whitewash Aunt Polly's fence for him by convincing them that it was great fun.  This was clearly the opposite of what they anticipated- painting a fence is boring and tedious work.  Any new parent is familiar with the approach.  If you want to get the kid to eat carrots, you tell him that he can only have carrots after he eats his broccoli.  If you want her to go to bed, tell her that she can stay up as late as she wants.  People naturally resist at being told what to do.  Instead, children want to feel like they are making the decision on their own.   And of course, this compulsion continues well into adulthood.  We don't want to be told what to do; we want to decide for ourselves.  Shrewed salespeople will tell the customer that there is another buyer in line for the car or house.  The threat of competition can motivate an undecided buyer quickly into making a decision.  The "Tom Sawyer" tactic, is in reality, a challenge to the recipent's perception in a given situation.

There is a genre of law school preparation books that also employ this tactic.  Anyone who has even casually looked into law school knows how hard it is.  But these would-be law school gurus argue that, "the game is rigged;"  "professors hide the ball intentionally;"  and finally, that "there are secrets, such as 'holy grail' outlines and 'shortcuts' that will give the savvy law student an advantage over the competition."  Further, these authors disdain the traditional approach to the study of law.  This perspective views hard work in law school as something only for suckers.  Some even advise students to get rid of their casebooks, stop "briefing" cases and focus their study on commercial outlines.   These books take the opposite tact of traditional, well-thought out law school preparation books, that walk the student through the fundamentals of legal study,legal analysis and legal practice.  After all, law school can't be as much work as everyone says it is, right?  There must be a "trick" to it.   These books purport to offer the trick.

The truth is this.  The study and practice of law is a lifelong endeavor.  That's why it's called a "practice".  In law school, you learn a new way of thinking about things.  We call it "thinking like a lawyer".  I've written about it in my book, Law School Labyrinth, A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (Kaplan Publishing, March 31, 2009)and I've blogged about it extensively here.  But the bottom line is that it is a definite skill that must be developed, like any skill.  And the development of that skill takes a great deal of work, thought, and introspection.  There are no shortcuts.  There is no "fast food" version of "thinking like a lawyer."  You have to learn to do it much like you learned to walk- one step at a time.  You read cases.  You brief those cases.  You prepare for the Socratic onslaught in class.  After class, you think about it some more and you capture all of it in you outline, so that you don't forget it.  And the practice of law works the same way.  You continually read, research, and dig into the facts and collaborate with your peers, in order to provide the best legal advice and representation possible.  This is why Type "A" personalities make such good lawyers.  They keep striving for perfection, although they know they will never achieve it.  And that's why law school is taught the way it is.  It works.  Thousands upon thousands of lawyers have trained this way for many, many years.   

I've been in law practice for a number of years now and I can see it clearly in hindsight.  My intellectual portfolio is the sum total of all of my experiences, good and bad.  And if I had attempted to skip those basic steps in the beginning, I am sure that I would not be the lawyer that I am today.

Certainly, the decision as to which approach you follow- law school is hard work; or law school is a rigged game and there are secret shortcuts, if only you will find them- is up to you.  But I would strongly suggest that you  don't eat the dessert, thinking that it's the entire meal. 

Best wishes in your legal studies.



 

If you're a pre-law or in law school, chances are good that you've heard the phrase, "thinking like a lawyer."  I heard it frequently in my first year of law school.  I mistakenly viewed it as yet another secret labrinthian code, a "secret handshake" if you will, of law school.  I thought that upon graduation, someone would hand me a sealed envelop, along with my diploma, and say "Read this grasshopper, and you will finally learn what it means to 'think like a lawyer.'"


The truth is, there is no real mystery to it at all.  "Thinking like a lawyer" means to think like a lawyer thinks.  "Circular proposition", you philosophy/ logic majors may declare.  Let me explain.  As with everything law school, I assumed that everything; every assertion, every argument, every point made had to logically equate.  After all, we learn early in law school about precedent and the legitimacy of the law.  The law has to be logical and  make sense, in order for it to maintain its legitimacy.  So, I assumed that the definition of "thinking like a lawyer" had to be composed of specific concepts, as legitimized by the actions of the universe of lawyers.

But as any Trekkie knows, as logical as he was, things simply didn't always add up for Mr. Spock.  This is because different people have different perspectives.  And those perspectives cause each of us to think differently about the same things.


And this is why I landed on the definition that I did for the concept of "thinking like a lawyer."  If you want to know what it means, you have to know how lawyers think. 

I've been in practice for a while now, and have worked with many lawyers.  I have known many law students as well.  And I frequently see characteristics in some law students that lead me to believe that they will become great lawyers one day.  This is not because I believe that one day, they will unlock a secret, ancient book that will yield the secrets of the ages about the practice of law to them.  It's because they are smart, hardworking, passionate and rational human beings.  And these traits will enable them to do the things that successful lawyers do.  Successful lawyers work hard for their clients.  Successful lawyers are rational and reasonable.  Successful lawyers care about their client's issues a great deal.  Successful lawyers look for every opportunity to find advantage for their clients.

Certainly, good lawyering means relying on facts and effectively applying the law to those facts.  A lot of law students master this piece early in law school and think they've mastered the legal reasoning process.  And perhaps they have.  But I would argue that a computer program can do the same thing.  Real mastery includes legal reasoning, but it also means a great deal more.  And it's the "more" part that leads to true knowledge of what "thinking like a lawyer" means.


And the good news, dear  law student, is that you are probably well along the way to learning to "think like a lawyer."  Chances are, you are already pretty smart (you got into law school, didn't you?).  You probably already know what hard work means.  And you are probably passionate about any number of issues.

So, my message to you is to think less about the mechanics of the lawyering process and allow yourself to become a great lawyer.  Use your God-given talents and abilities for the greater good.  Become zealous advocates for your clients and learn to give them the very best possible advice.

You can do this.

After Christmas break my first year of law school, I overheard classmates commiserating about family members that had seemingly become less intelligent.  "I couldn't even have an intelligent discussion," one classmate complained.  "Yeah, it's like everyone has suddenly become stupid," laughed the other.

It's true:  once you've been through the law school  forging process, it's easy to get frustrated with lay people.  This is because you spend three years in law school learning to read intensely and with precision, supporting every assertion and assumption you make with facts, and analyzing problems with tight logic.  As any law student knows, jumping to a conclusion (also known as "conclusory" thinking) is the kiss of death to anyone engaged in legal argument.

I was in business for a number of years before law school.  Business is largely about making stuff (either tangible or intangible) and selling it.  Making stuff requires precision; selling stuff requires unrestrained creativity.  Businesspeople, especially those on the front end (the sellers) have to be creative and have a "I'll knock down any wall" attitude.  At the same time, those on the back end (those making and accounting for the stuff) have to be able to quantify and document the business operation.

Lawyers in business are charged with essentially two tasks:  helping the business manage risk and protecting the rights of the business.  We do this by identifying risks, documenting agreements, and advising businesspeople on both.  One of the most important skills required in these tasks is the ability to anticipate potential outcomes.  We learn this skill in law school with what I call "On the one hand" thinking. 

"On the one hand" thinking means objectively identifying both sides of an argument.  And it means identifying the various potential outcomes in any given situation.  Law students everywhere learn to think in this way.  When asked about the potential outcome of a sales dispute, a good law student might approach it this way.  "On the one hand" they might argue, "the UCC requires all contracts for the sale of goods to be in writing."  And they counter, "But on the other hand, the jurisdiction in which these facts occurred may not have adopted the UCC".  And so, the logical answer to the question turns upon the facts. 

Conclusory thinking, on the other hand (I guess I intended this pun) would assume that the UCC applies and simply answer, "They breached the contract."  That student made a bad assumption and jumped to a conclusion.  And as any law student knows, conclusory thinking is a guaranteed "C" or even "D" on an exam.  So, law students quickly learn to identify both sides of an issue, support their analyses with facts and assume nothing.

People who haven't been through the law school crucible may or may not naturally think in this way.  Most people do not take the time to identify or even understand the assumptions imbedded within their analysis.  In some cases, their assumptions turn out to be correct, and their conclusion is correct.  In other cases, they make bad assumptions, leading to bad conclusions.

And this is why to new law students, everyone suddenly becomes "stupid".  Law students (and some lawyers) want everyone else to identify assumptions and think logically.  But in the real world, everything isn't always logical.  And engaging someone who doesn't "think like a lawyer" in a debate about something can lead to frustration.

If you've been through law school, here's the good news.  You probably have learned to think in an extremely logical way.  But the bad news is the world around you may not.  So here's the moral to the story.  Seek first to understand, and then be understood.  Hone your listening skills and endeavor to understand where others are coming from.  Avoid being argumentative.  Chances are, you are right.  But that doesn't mean you have to prove to others that they are wrong.

Learn to be patient and compassionate.  A lot of people don't know what they don't know.  Don't make it your mission to educate them.  You'll last longer in your career and make a lot less enemies.

At the same time, be true to yourself and your profession.  Offer candid and high-quality advice.  Never stop striving to tighten up your analysis, based upon the best legal research and intense scrutiny of the facts.  Be the best lawyer you can be.  But always remember that what you are providing is advice.  It's up to the client to decide to take the advice.  And clients don't always "think like a lawyer".

I wish you much success in  your legal career.


 

There are days in law practice where you may feel as though the circus has come to town and you're told to follow the elephant with a shovel.  Despite your advice and everyone's best intentions, messes happen.  And when they do, people turn to lawyers to help clean them up. 

Television shows and movies have stereotyped the practice of law as drama.  At the last minute in a courtroom scene, the defense attorney asks the witness a question, causing the witness to confess to the crime.  The zealous public defender rescues her client from execution at the last possible minute.  Lawyers fight for truth, justice and the American way.

The truth is that much of what you will do as a lawyer is not glamorous.  Poring through a fifty-page contract to figure out exactly what the parties intended (or at least memorialized), can be tedious.  Reviewing box after box of documents can become mind-numbing.  Cleaning up a mess that could have been avoided to begin with can be frustrating.  But here's the point. 

A wise lawyer I worked with once said:  "We worry, so that our clients don't have to."  And that statement sums up the essence of a large part of your professional responsibilities.  Lawyers focus on the details to make sure that their clients don't inadvertently get into trouble.  But you don't get any awards for minding the details.  And preventative advice, even if followed, can be forgotten unless a problem arises.  So, much of what you will be doing as a lawyer, is at its core about helping people.

And that is what lawyers really do.  They help people.  It is often not glamorous and may even not be appreciated, but the object of the profession is to help people.  And so, my message is this.  As you contemplate law school in these turbulent economic times, check your motives for going to law school.  If they involve riches, success and fame, you might want to consider another career.  IAlthough many lawyers achieve these, I doubt that any of them were the original motive.  Instead, they were a by-product.  But there are also many fulfilled lawyers who never achieve the trappings of success.    And students who enter law school dreaming of this kind of success and incur huge debt can find themselves bitter and disaffected five years later.

On the other hand, I see lawyers every day who find themselves behind the elephant, smiling and just glad to be there.  They know that what they are doing, although perhaps unappreciated and definitely not glamorous, is worthwhile and meaningful.  These folks don't do it for the glory or money.  They do it because they are committed to the practice of law and to their fellow citizens.  And if you are fortunate enough to be able to practice law, never forget that it is a privilege.  And serving others is the primary objective.

As you consider your future as a lawyer, be sure and read my book, Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education. (Kaplan Publishing, March 31, 2009). 

Best wishes in your legal career.

A cynic would argue that the personal statement is a waste of time and that only your LSAT and undergraduate GPA matter in your law school application.  However, many of the top law schools use the personal statement as the tiebreaker between applicants with similar academic and LSAT credentials.  In addition, your personal statement should not be that difficult to write.  Further, a well-written essay is insurance at a very low cost, in the event that your school of choice’s admission officer or committee does actually look at it. 

I would suggest that you avoid writing a lofty, esoteric personal statement.  Instead focus on who you are.  The purpose of the personal statement is to give the law school insight into you as a person, in a way that your numbers alone cannot reveal.  Schools frequently impose word limits on the personal statement.  Even if the school does not have a limit on length, you should limit your personal statement to two pages.

Using anecdotes and even allegory can be useful literary devices.  You should write a personal statement that you would want to read, and stories are often the most interesting reading.  Humor can also be appropriate, however, be careful not to sound silly or immature.  Tell the admissions decision makers about you.  Everyone has an interesting anecdote about himself or herself.  However, it is difficult for many of us to see the interest value in our own stories.  It might be of benefit to consult with your friends and family, who may be an objective source of anecdotal ideas.  Now is not the time to be shy and self-effacing.  However, it is equally not the time to boast indiscriminately.

Stories about overcoming hardship and adversity are interesting because they give admissions committees insight into your character.  Stories which describe lessons learned are equally interesting because they provide a glimpse into how you think and grow.   By the same token, a snapshot into your personality may also stand out and be an effective antidote to thousands of personal statements, written by students who take themselves too seriously.  Be creative, be different, and be interesting.

Review and revise your personal statement until it is an interesting, tight read.  Open with an attention-grabbing premise and keep the reader interested with insight into your personality.  As you draft and redraft the statement, eliminate redundancy and excess verbiage.  Use short sentences to add “punch” to your prose.

Remember that although a good personal statement may not get you into law school, a bad one will certainly keep you out.  Simply write something interesting and informative, in a respectful and appropriate tone.

Finally, your personal statement should be perfect.  There should be no grammatical errors, punctuation errors or typographical errors.  And if you're thinking about law school, you need to pick up a copy of my book, Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (Kaplan Publishing, March 31, 2009).

You have prepared extensively.  You have worked numerous practice problems.  Your test scores have improved substantially since you took your first diagnostic test.  There are also some things you can do to optimize your performance on test day.  The following are tips which may be helpful:

Be Physically Ready on Test Day.

Assuming that you have worked diligently and are as prepared as you can be, I would suggest that beginning the afternoon before the test, you try to relax.  Do something fun, see a movie, have a nice dinner and get some rest.

On test day, wake up with plenty of time to spare.  Eat a decent breakfast.  Avoid caffeine.  Get in a brief workout, especially something aerobic.  Go for a run or get on the treadmill.  Getting your blood circulating and oxygen to the brain will have a very positive effect on your exam performance.

Allow yourself plenty of time to get to the test center.

 If you are not sure where the test center is, I suggest you drive there a day or two before the exam.  This will allow you to avoid any potential stress of finding the location, parking and other unnecessary hassles on test day. 

Enjoy the experience.  This is your first step toward your goal.  You have prepared and your efforts will be rewarded.

Work at a Measured Pace. 

With approximately 25-28 questions and 35 minutes per section, you have approximately 1 minutes and 20 seconds to read the question , answer each question, and” bubbling” your answer sheet.  There is no penalty for guessing on the LSAT.  Approximately five minutes prior to time is called for each section, you should begin to bubble in any blanks left on your answer sheet. 

Some people think that “C” is the favored answer choice among the test writers; others have their own personal favorite.  It doesn’t matter which letter you choose.  Just don’t leave any blanks on your answer sheet.

Use Process of Elimination.

This is one of the biggest payoff techniques you can use.  After you read the string of answer choices, there will likely be one or two obviously incorrect answers.  Get these out of your way—eliminate them by drawing a line through them or crossing them out.  However, make sure you have read the passage carefully before you eliminate any possible answers. 

Occasionally, the test writers are clever enough to come up with an answer choice that looks obviously incorrect at first glance, but upon deeper investigation turns out to be the correct answer.  This is a rare event, however, most of the time obviously incorrect answers are just that.

After you are comfortable with the question, try and to eliminate the obviously incorrect answers and get them out of your way.  Sometimes this simple process will cause the correct answer to immediately stand out.

 The random probability of getting any answer correct is one in five, or 20%.  If you can eliminate incorrect answers, your probability of guessing the correct answer increases exponentially.  For example, if you can eliminate two incorrect answers, your probability increases to one in three.  If you eliminate three incorrect answers, your probability of guessing the correct answer is one in two, or 50%.

Budget Your Time and Stick to Your Budget.

All questions, no matter how difficult, are valued equally.  The temptation for most students when faced with a difficult question is to struggle with it.  Resist the temptation.  Remind yourself that the question is only worth one point.  Move on to questions you can answer.

Similarly, allocate equal time to each question.  Allow yourself sufficient time to bubble in the answer sheet.  Work smoothly and steadily.

Remember that you can miss 20 questions and still score approximately a 165, which is above the 90th percentile.  If you are faced with a difficult question, either bubble in a guess or move on and come back to it.  My advice is to go ahead and bubble in an answer, in order to avoid incorrect bubbling on other questions.

Answer Every Question.  

There is absolutely no penalty for guessing on the LSAT.  Each question has five answer choices.  Thus, a complete guess has a 20% chance of being correct.  An educated guess improves your odds exponentially. 

Answer every question, and you will improve your chances of a good score.

Bubble Your Answer Sheet Periodically. 

One of the quickest ways to create problems for yourself is to forget to bubble in your answer sheet.  I would advise bubbling every five or ten questions.  This will reduce the risk that you will lose your place or incorrectly bubble.  The actual increment is unimportant. What is important is that you bubble regularly and that your bubbling correctly aligns your intended answers with those on your answer sheet.

Don’t Be Afraid to Cancel Your Test Score. 

If something happens to you on test day—you are ill or some other catastrophic event and you do not want your test score reported, you can cancel the score.  The LSAC advises that you must send them a signed fax or overnight letter with your request within nine calendar days of the test. You can also cancel your score at the test center.  However, you should be absolutely certain you want to cancel your score.

You should be aware, however, that ordinarily you may not take the LSAT more than three times in any two-year period.

If You Perform Poorly, Take the LSAT Again. 

If you perform substantially worse than you have done on practice tests, consider taking the test again.  Be aware that the LSAC will report all test scores to schools that you apply to.  LSAC will automatically report the results of all LSATs you have taken, including cancellations, since June 1, 2000. The LSAC averages the scores and also reports each separately.  Most schools will average your scores for use with their admissions criteria.

And if you're thinking about law school, be sure and pick up a copy of my book, Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education. 

There are over 200 law schools presently operating in the United States.  Most of those are accredited by the American Bar Association.  Some law schools are approved only by the state bar examining authorities, which means that graduates from those schools can practice only in that state.

There are a variety of criteria that can affect your choice of schools.  School reputation, curriculum, location, tuition rates and faculty-student ratios all can play a part in your decision.  Probably the biggest is the simple fact of whether you have the requisite grades and LSAT score to get admitted to a particular school.

 Law School Reputation 

The popular weekly magazine, U.S. News and World Report publishes annually a ranking of every accredited law school in the country.  The rankings are based on a variety of objective criteria such as class size, library size and other variables.  The so-called “Top Twenty Schools” in this ranking are the most sought-after law schools by students and law firm recruiters.

Naturally, many law schools disdain these rankings.  The deans of a number of law schools got together a few years back and published an open letter regarding therankings.  The letter essentially said that the student’s choice of law school should be about much more than rankings.  I certainly agree with the premise. 

However, generally speaking, students from the highest-ranked schools will have an easier time finding employment following graduation.  That said, there are numerous jobs out there, which can be found in a variety of ways.  Many of these employers are happy to employ lawyers from mid or even lower-ranked law schools. 

Students who either do not have the requisite LSAT/GPA numbers, or who do not want to incur substantial debt may choose a lesser-ranked school and have extremely rewarding careers.  In addition, as discussed below, these students frequently are able to commence their careers free of burdensome student debt and are therefore relieved of the pressure of having to take a job they won’t really enjoy.

 You Don’t Necessarily Get What You Pay For 

There are many good regional schools in the United States.  Most of these are state schools, with reasonably tuition for in-state residents.  Other schools are nationally recognized.  These are the so-called “prestige” schools. 

You can get a good idea of which law schools are viewed as the most desirable schools from these rankings.  Many law school representatives disdain these rankings on the basis that they are not comprehensive and do not consider all of the factors that make a law school.  Regardless, these rankings are generally accepted in the legal community and law firms.  Most prospective law students consider these rankings as gospel.

The statement I am about to make will be considered by many to be heresy.  Having known and worked with numerous lawyers who have graduated from a variety of law schools, I have become convinced that the quality of legal education among schools is actually pretty similar, regardless of which law school you choose.

Let’s face it.  There are only so many variations program.  Even Socrates himself could only vary the Socratic teaching method in just a few ways.  Class outlines and subject matter are so universal that a veritable cottage industry has emerged selling commercial outlines.  Your legal education is less about the school itself and more about what you make of it.  Some of the most successful lawyers come from the worst schools, and vice-versa.

And as far as bottom lines go, the bottom line to your legal education is your bar card.  Without it, you cannot practice law.  So, the ultimate goal of law school is to pass the bar.  This is so, despite the conventional wisdom that the purpose of law school is to teach you how to “think like a lawyer”.

I overheard my first year Contracts professor talking to a group of students after class one day.  He frequently held court after class and students ostensibly to would ask questions about a finer point of law.  In reality, they were hoping to earn a few brownie points with the professor. 

One student asked the professor whether a particular area of law would be tested on the bar exam.  The professor responded, “We don’t worry about your passing the bar.  You take BARBRI for that.  We teach you to think.”  As an aside, BARBRI is the commercial bar exam preparation course that the majority of bar examinees take, in order to prepare for the exam.

With all respect due that professor, my response to that comment is that law professors don’t worry about the bar exam, because they don’t have to take the test.   By the time students are faced with the bar exam, they are but a distant memory to the law school professor.  In other words, there is no real accountability to help law students pass their bar exams. 

This attitude is prevalent among the top law schools:  “we teach you to think.”  In my opinion, this is an overstatement.  I would argue that law schools, especially the top schools, are overplaying their role in the development of students.  Instead, the typical “Type A,” overachieving, 165-170 LSAT, 4.10 GPA entering law student has already demonstrated the ability to “think” long before they entered law school. 

I would further argue that law schools are taking credit for the intelligence of a group of incredibly bright people, who were that way long before they ever thought about law school.

Certainly, while in law school, you will hone your deductive and analytical reasoning skills.  You will learn how to sift through facts, apply those facts to legal principles and develop analyses to predict how a rationally thinking judge will rule on an issue.  But your law school will not teach you this process.  You must understand it, both from a macro and micro perspective, and master it.  And by the way, you still have to pass the bar exam.

The lower-ranked schools, on the other hand, focus substantial energy on equipping their students to pass the bar exam.  Bar passage rates are a source of huge pride for these schools.  Many of these schools have much higher passage rates than the nationally ranked prestige schools.  They provide strict curricula, with bar exam subjects being the primary focus.  These schools offer few esoteric legal subjects, but instead require students to take the tough courses, such as secured transactions, commercial paper and the like.  And their students pass the bar.

Finally, the declaration that BARBRI alone will enable you to pass the bar exam is a reckless assertion.  To rely solely on BARBRI as your bar preparation guarantees that you will have ten of the most stressful weeks of your life following law school graduation.  As is discussed throughout this book, regardless of where you are in your legal studies, you need to know the law.  This is true for bar exam purposes and it is true for law school exam purposes.

Learning legal reasoning is important.  However, as is discussed in my book, "Law School Labyrinth", knowing the law is critical to your developing legal reasoning skills.

A “name” law school may be a great career ticket; however, if the school is unwilling to teach you the law, perhaps your tuition dollars are better served at a lower-ranked school with a rigorous curriculum.  And if you're thinking about law school, you need to pick up a copy of my book:  Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (Kaplan Publishing, March 31, 2009. 

As purely an investment decision, picking the right law school is one of the most important investment decisions you will make.  Certainly, buying a home is a big investment.  However, if dissatisfied, you can always sell your home.  Law school tuition, on the other hand, is non-refundable.  And once you have graduated from law school, to a certain extent, your future career path is predetermined.

Despite everything you may hear from your school, the rankings are important.  A law degree from a so-called “name” school is a virtual guarantee of a good job following graduation.  However, the rankings are also a good predictor of law school tuition.  Therefore, it is important that you select a school that meets your career needs, but no more so than necessary.

For example, many good law firms recruit primarily local candidates.  If you grew up in a city, have lived there all of your life, and plan to stay there forever, it maymake good sense to graduate from your local law school. Even if the school does not make the top 100 by any list’s standards, it may be a wise economic choice nonetheless.  

Tuition for in-state residents at their local law school is often substantially less than private schools.  If you do well, graduate near the top of your class, or are on Law Review, you will be able to land a good job with a good firm.

In addition, you should spend some time in introspection regarding your career plans.  For example, if you are absolutely certain that you will spend your entire career in public interest work, it may make sense to attend a lower-ranked (and less expensive) law school.  You should also be aware that some law schools will forgive a portion or all of your debt if you choose to practice in an area of public interest.  Further, if your long-term plans contemplate a non-legal career, you may not need the credential of so-called “name” school.  A mere J.D. will more than suffice for your needs.

On the other hand, if you are bound for the large, prestigious law firm life, you may need a “name” school degree.  Many of the large, behemoth “national” firms recruit exclusively from the select pool of the top candidates from only the top schools.  Further, a “B” student from Duke Law School will generally be more sought after than a “B” student from Local Law School.  However, with tuition of private schools typically three or four times that of state schools, most students graduating from private schools will be forced to work for a large law firm, which pays a large salary.

The point of the foregoing discussion is to encourage you to carefully think through this important expenditure.  As with any major purchase decision, you should carefully decide how much law school tuition you can afford and are willing to spend, in light of your career interests.   You should assess the value you will receive for those tuition dollars.

For example, in Nashville, Tennessee, which is a mid-sized legal market, there are certainly a large number of Vanderbilt graduates practicing law.  However, there are also a large number of graduates from the Nashville School of Law, which is approved by the Tennessee Board of Board of Law Examiners, but not accredited by the American Bar Association.  This means that graduates may only practice law in Tennessee.  However, the tuition at Nashville School of Law is approximately $4500 per semester, while tuition at Vanderbilt is approximately $16,000 per semester.

If your career plans don’t require a degree from a top-tier school, it may not make sense to spend top dollar for a law degree.  As an investment, you may be better served with a lower-cost mid-ranged school.  And while you're at it, to get the most out of law school, be sure and pick up a copy of my book, Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (Kaplan Publishing, March 31, 2009). 

As an intitial caveat, what I am about to tell you runs counter to pretty much all conventional wisdom about law schools.  It is almost axiomatic that "you go to the best law school you can get into."  The primary reason for the axiom is that historically, it has always been easier for students from higher-ranked schools to find jobs upon graduation.

However, in my opinion and especially given today's legal employment economy, this axiom may not always hold true.  And when you factor in the continuing escalation of law school costs, especially at the so-called "Ivy League" schools, it is definitely "caveat emptor" (buyer beware) for prospective law students.

A good way to think about it is this.  There are arguably two basic types of law students.  First, there are students who go to law school because they really want to become lawyers.  They love reading, debate, analysis supported with facts (as opposed to opinion), they may want to "change the world" or at least, to help people.  In short, they are pretty much wired to practice law.  Money is secondary to these people; their first priority is the work itself.  Most of these people end up practicing law for their entire careers; in some cases well past conventional retirement age.

The other basic type of law student (and please understand, I am in no way passing judgment on these folks) seeks to go to law school for more complicated reasons.  They may not be exactly sure of what they want to do for the rest of their lives.  The idea of business school doesn't appeal to them.  Maybe  their undergraduate degree didn't exactly pan out as they had planned.  Or, perhaps they simply are intrigued by the power, money and prestige that can come with a legal education.  Some of these people see a law degree as a means to an end-  perhaps as a business person, Wall Streeter, or academic.  Many of these people practice law for a short period before moving on to their real career interests.

Which brings me to law school choice.  "Local U" may be the most economically efficient choice, depending upon your career plans.  Further, it may make sense if you are either of the above-mentioned two "types."  For example, if you are the first type, love the law and plan to practice in your hometown, "Local U" may serve you perfectly.  It will cost less and thus result in less pressure to seek a high-paying big firm job when you graduate (unfortunately, law student debt often is the primary factor in students' post-graduation employment decisions).  Further, "Local U" graduates are just as qualified to sit for the bar exam as are Ivy Leaguers

As far as the quality of legal education goes, that's a pretty subjective area.  One way of looking at it is to look at a school's bar exam pass rates.  Arguably, there should be a correlation between pass rates and the competency of that school's graduates.  Interestingly, top schools do not always have the highest pass rates (in fact, I knew of a grad from a top, top law school who worked at my first firm, who failed the Texas bar exam twice).  On the other hand, top schools generally have professors with the highest academic credentials, namely that they graduated from top schools.  However, the cynic in me notes that in law school, we call this a "circular proposition"-  top schools are "top" because they have professors who went to the "top" schools.  It kind of makes you dizzy,doesn't it?

Certainly, with a highly-ranked law school on your resume, you will likely have a broader range of career options.  However, depending upon your career plans, you may not need a broad range of options (big caveat here:  many twenty-somethings simply don't have career plans; I know I certainly did not.).  It's sort of like using a bazooka when a .22 caliber will do. 

Regardless, the point is this.  Do not go into gigantic debt without at least thinking about it.  Instead, give your career and future plans deep thought.  Talk with a lot of people about your plans.  Seek advice from a broad cross section of knowledgeable folks-  your parents (stop groaning) and other relatives (even if they haven't been to law school, they are likely a bit wiser than you and their opinion is valuable), lawyers, law students, law professors and others.  Most people would be more than willing to help you as you make this huge financial decision.

By the way, this analysis is the first, and arguably the most important of many analyses that you will do throughout your legal career.  Good lawyers pay attention to the details.  Good lawyers analyze with facts.  Good lawyers seek advice when they are outside their expertise.  Good lawyers prepare and prepare, in order to avoid unpleasant surprises.  Your law school decision is your first opportunity to begin to "think like a lawyer."

I know it all seems pretty intimidating right now.  But you can do this.  It won't necessarily be easy.  But then again, much of life isn't easy.  That's what makes the end game worthwhile.  You will become a lawyer, if you want it bad enough.  I just know it.

Best wishes in your law school decision and your legal career.  And while you're at it, to maximize your law school experience, pick up a copy of my book, Law School Labyrinth- A Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (March 31, 2009).