Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.4K All Categories
- 28.1K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 13 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 111 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 31 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 636 Technical Problems
- 286 Off-topic
why don't more ppl quit their jobs to study for the LSAT -- if they are financially able to do so?
my question is : why don't more ppl quit their jobs to study for the LSAT -- if they are financially able to do so?
i understand that for many ppl, they need to work to pay off loans, living expenses, etc (which are all reasons to do have a job). But I'm more asking for those who have enough savings, family support, etc (where finances would not be a problem).
I'm in favor of part-time work and volunteering when full-time studying for the LSAT (much needed mental breaks is important). But what I'm really confused is why people with demanding 60-hour a week jobs who can't get enough LSAT studying in don't just quit their jobs to study for the LSAT?
the LSAT is the most important part of your application. It's like weighted 4-5 times more than your GPA.
If someone has military experience, tons of prestigious extracurricular activities and awards, and other additional amazing work experiences, but has a 150 LSAT score, it's going to be really tough to get into a t14 law school.
Contrast that to a K-JD candidate who has no work experience but a 175 LSAT score -- who will most likely get into many if not most of the T14.
--
A 170+ LSAT score can literally change your life -- and save you hundreds of thousands of dollars. It will allow you attend a T14 law school and open up many many doors to you --BigLaw, federal clerkships, etc. Many T-20 law schools will also give you full scholarships worth up to $200,000 for a 170+ LSAT score.
Given how important the LSAT is, why don't more people devote themselves to it? The expected rate of return for a 170+ LSAT score and its impact it'll have on saving you money (potentially 200k) and opening up doors for you is MUCH MORE than working as paralegal making 30k a year and not having enough time to adequately prep for the LSAT.
We all know how much work the LSAT takes. Many ppl do upwards of 60 PT's before they take the real test.
Why do people settle for less and allow a 50-hour a week paralegal job (for example) prevent them from reaching their goals?
Financially, those 50 hours are much more valuable when used studying for the LSAT (considering how many hundreds of thousands of dollars you'll potentially save with a 170+ Lsat score)
Comments
What? Students studying for the LSAT need to make money in order to survive. There are many many students out there that support their families or have children or need to take care of their parents financially. I'm sure if everyone was financially secure then everyone would be studying for the LSAT full-time. Once you are done with undergrad there are loans that you probably need to start repaying and thus, need a job. Your comments and questions make sense, but not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to quit their job.
First, not everyone has the resources. See @"LSAT Warrior Princess" on financial obligations of human beings.
Second, many people not on 7 sage don't know how much studying can impact your score.
Third, getting from a score like 150 to 170+ may take a long time and worse an unknowably long period of time. If you could just lock it in and write off six months or even a year and make the exchange more people would do it, but there is a risk that a 3 monthsb 6 months, or a year will come and go and you won't quite have the resources to keep studying full time and will have burned the resources that you had.
Fourth, It isn't necessarilly just those months of lost income. After you get your score, you are going to apply to law school. That is expensive and will bring all sorts of expenses, but you were going to get those eventually anyway. However, while you are waiting for your admission results you are now either going to be dealing with the stress of dealing with looking for and then hopefully dealing with a new job you will be at for less than a year or you will be unemployed.
Fifth, they can study while working full time and still get all the benefits you listed. It just takes longer. So they don't have to decide between their job and the LSAT. On the additional plus side they may be saving money over that stretch or paying back old loans. They are also developing valuable work experience. For them when they eventually get their score and go to law school they will actually choose the law over the career they have developed rather than a nebulous pool of possibilities.
The more I read your post, the more offensive it becomes lmao. So, some points:
I think you're vastly vastly overestimating the number of people who can take off an extended period of time with no income. For most people it's not a simple choice between working for 30k/year and studying for the LSAT. You think if someone didn't need to work for peanuts, they would? Of course not---it's a necessity for the vast, vast majority of applicants. If you have saved, or have mom and dad, or a partner willing to finance your LSAT study, that's awesome! But I'd say that places you in the wealthiest 1-5% of test takers. Remember, 7Sage is so popular not only because it's an amazing course (it is!) but also because it's relatively cheap. Many people can't afford even the $800 course, never mind giving up their income for 6 months.
I can't imagine thinking "why don't people just give up their income to study for a test! It's so easy!" lmao
@kimmy_m66 @"Seeking Perfection"
thanks for following up and your thoughtful responses!
i absolutely agree with most of what you guys say!
i guess the point I was thinking is that if (in this imperfect theoretical example), if someone could achieve a 170 LSAT score studying full time for 9 months, vs. someone achieving that 170 LSAT score studying for 5 years with a demanding full-time job, which would be better? I think it may just depend on the person. Some people may want to go to law school sooner than later.
Also, I feel that many people who are working full time (After a few years of studying) may be tempted just to get the LSAT over with, and take it when they are not fully prepared. I've heard many stories of people who achieved mediocre LSAT scores due to the fact they had demanding jobs and didn't have enough time to study for the LSAT.
I think a huge question is just what's the best way to be done with the LSAT to get a 170+ score. For many people who are starting in the 140s and 150s, getting to the 170s is a huge undertaking.
Some people would rather just take one full year to go full time and try to knock out the LSAT ASAP, whereas others may spread it out over like 5 years while working.
But at the same time, for those 5 years you spent working in (for example, a 30k/year paralegal job) while studying for the LSAT, if you have had just gotten the LSAT done in 9 full time months, you could've already finished law school and been making biglaw salary at $190k. so there is an opportunity cost to dragging out LSAT preparation while working full time.
anything else i'm missing? would love any comments/thoughts/advice, thanks.
WHAT?! You mean I can quit my job and study for the LSAT full time? NO WAY why didn't anyone suggest this to me before?!!!! oh wait, what about my health insurance, rent, car insurance, car payment, phone bill, student loans, food, electricity, water, clothing........ Also, who are these people that are financially secure enough to take off a year to study for the LSAT. Especially straight out of undergrad? I want to meet them.
If I didn't want to survive then I would totally quit my job. It must be nice to have someone to pay for all of this stuff for them... #bitter. haha.
thanks for following up! well during college, one has 3 summers. Usually, for your junior summer, if you do a summer analyst position at an investment bank or a consulting firm, you can make approximately 15k. And if you worked those two other summers (let's say you made 5k a summer for those summers), that's another 10k. So that's 25k. If you subtract like 5k for living expenses and other stuff during those summers, that's still 20k left.
so it's doable to use that 20k to full time prep for the LSAT. again, these are also very rough numbers in a rough hypothetical example.
Why do you think they don't? If someone can take time off to study full time and doesn't care that they'll have a blank spot on their resume, they probably do. I think there is also some overlap that makes this sort of a futile issue to game out: some people would struggle to study enough even if they didn't work full time; others are going to study enough no matter how much they work; others want the work experience either for its inherent value or for a resume hit/avoiding a blank spot.
Yeah, I'm agreed with the others that I think you are just vastly overestimating the number of people who are able to do that, financially and/or logistically. Even if I had a year's worth of savings (lol that sounds nice), I have some health conditions that mean I absolutely have to have health insurance. And I'm well over the age 26 cut off that I could be on my parents' insurance. Not that my parents would have even allowed me to stay on theirs that long and not be working haha. I come from a very "salt of the earth", working class kind of family. Work isn't an option. I've had a full time job every summer break since I was 14. If I'm not in school, I'm working. My parents would not have been on board with financing a year of me choosing not to work.
Honestly, I don't even think that's necessarily the best path and I tell people not to do that. I think your brain can only absorb so much of this material per day. At the very least, folks who leave a full time job should be part time working or volunteering. It also doesn't look good to schools if someone hasn't been working. They don't really want you to not work for 9 months or a year just to study for this test. They want to see work experience. Law school is a professional school and preparing folks to go out into the workforce. Working 50 hours per week as a paralegal is very valuable, both financially and practically.
Also, studying for the LSAT while working full time speaks well to someone's ability to stay on task and handle a very full workload, which is a good skill to have in law school. Many of us around here work full time because we have to. And I have so much respect for those that work full time and have a spouse and kids and pull this off. That is a solid work ethic and sign of dedication to this path.
But I think what it really comes down to is that most people don't have the luxury of not working for an extended period of time. I know you prefaced your post by acknowledging that, but I think that the number who are able to do that is much, much smaller than you think it is.
I appreciate your comment. That is some really awesome planning!!!! Is that what you did? Just curious.
That is a crazy amount of money for someone to earn while they are still in undergrad without a degree. What about student loans? How are they paying for their tuition? What about textbooks and room and board? So, approximately that person earns $1,666.00 a month at a investment bank or consulting firm? Two of those summers without a degree? Honestly, I think that is a lot of money for someone still in undergrad to get paid. Bottom line is that for myself and where I live that is not practical. I mean looking back now I do wish that I saved money.
"Some people would rather just take one full year to go full time and try to knock out the LSAT ASAP, whereas others may spread it out over like 5 years while working."
Yeah... taking off work entirely for 9 months would be awesome. I'm sure everyone studying would do that if they could. It's entirely not an option for 99% of us. You keep making it sound like people can choose that and just go to law school sooner. Not how life works.
Haha... oh man. I mean, I guess maybe theoretically this is possible? I don't know. I have a hard time imaging someone in undergrad making $15k in a summer as a financial analyst, with no degree. Maybe that's a thing. But also it's not like everyone has the skills or desire to work in banking. Very few of us around here probably did or could have done that.
Even if that were all true, it's not like everyone can just pocket that money and save it up for later. I worked every summer and would take home about $6k for those three months, but then that was my money for books, groceries, utilities, and spending money for the entire other 9 months of the school year. Usually by June I'd have about $20 left in my bank account. And that is with a little bit of cash support from my parents.
I'm guessing you are just coming from a perspective of someone who easily has the financial ability to do all of this, and we're telling you... the vast majority of people in the world and (on this board) don't have that luxury. That is a very rare case that someone has the financial ability to do all of the things you are saying.
Generally, quitting your job to study is a terrible idea. Why would admissions take someone with a 180 who didn't work over someone who got a 175 while working a full time job? It is only getting more competitive so there will be people who are working and get great scores. While it is true that the LSAT is the most important component, it is not the only component; law schools care way more about the whole package, especially where they could probably get enough people with great scores to uphold their medians.
thanks for the comments
didn't read but another thing to consider is that "full-time studying" for most is probably not really full time. It's very difficult to put in truly effective and productive 8 hours of LSAT studying a day and most could get the same benefits from not taking such a drastic approach. I'm all for just studying for the LSAT but there is definitely a lot of down time
Just wanted to join the discussion to give my perspective. I guess I would fall into the somewhat full time LSAT study group. I”m a self employed equity/options trader that’s how I afford the bills. Everyday I would spend hours reading the markets then I would study the LSAT. As previously mentioned not knowing the definite amount of time it’ll take to to reach 170 is extremely burdensome. I’ve been studying for about 18 months now and I still can’t hit it. Was it worth it ? I can’t answer since I’m still trying to hit it. In this time frame I could have gotten my certified professional accountant designation but I gave up everything for the LSAT. Seeing my friends move further in life while I’m stuck with trying to get a score on a test that won’t even matter for long has drastic consequences on your mental health haha. I can only do this since I was fortunate enough to find a skill that let me paid the bills while LSATing. Hope I make it soon . Darn you RC !
Haven't had a chance to catch up on the comments but I think that your calculations are missing underlying variables. While theoretically it may seem like the nice option, it's almost impossible for many, many students.
I agree with the idea that people could dedicate more time to studying. But I don't think quitting working is the wisest way to free time. And I think most people aren't capable of studying 40 hours a week.
I feel the same way with all my friends progressing in their lives and I’m still studying for the lsat haha. You are not alone!! I’m pretty sure at this point my friends are thinking what is wrong with this girl- why is she is still studying for this test?!! Best of luck on your future test date! You got this!!
chiming in here. although i didn't read every single comment posted thus far, i just wanted to say that there are people out there whose goal isn't to get a 170+ and go to a t14. so lets say in this hypothetical universe, we all have the time and money and our obligations being taken care of -- no responsibilities and time to do whatever you please. do you think every person with these luxuries will be spending 100% of their free time studying for the lsat? i doubt it. there are different people with different aspirations.
one of my friends, his parents pay for everything, parties a bunch. spends his parent's hard earned money on cocaine and drinks/food. studies for the lsat maybe twice a month and doesn't BR. he has all the time in the world -- it's just not as important to him. there's a difference between can't and won't!
@JustDoIt
i'm not trying to compare LSAT takers with scores of 180 and 175.
What I'm saying is this. You have 2 students. Both score 145 on their diagnostic.
One person spends one year full time studying for the test (studying for a total of 1200 hours) -- and ends up with a 170.
The other person spends one year studying for the test while also working a demanding paralegal job (studying for a total of 500 hours) - and scores a 160.
Chances are, the guy who scores a 170 is going to have a better cycle than the guy who scores 160.
--
Now let's say that guy after spending 4 years studying for the LSAT while also working full-time, he finally scores a 170.
That's a 3 year opportunity cost (compared to the other guy, who would've already finished law school by then and started making 190k).
Also, those 3 years working as a paralegal while studying for the LSAT (or whatever you do before law school) arguably mean very little in one's legal career (granted, it might help you with OCI and be personally enriching). But after one graduates from law school (and for most people) start BigLaw, they make 190k as a first-year associate. It doesn't matter if you're K-JD or if you've spent 20 years in the military before law school. A fresh law school grad makes 190k.
A couple points. First, I'm not sure that's a healthy way of looking at things. A moderately lucky Top 14 grad with Big Law as his or her goal(which isn't everyone) does make $190,000 out of law school if that is their goal and they are in New York. But not everyone who tries gets it even at a Top 14. That is especially true with minimal experience and certainly if the economy stops doing as well as it has been.
The second point is that it isn't really an opportunity cost exactly. If you make Big Law, it isn't like you keep the position forever. I think about half leave in the first two years and most of the rest after three to four when you start to get better opportunities to leave. Unless they transition within Big Law that comes with a huge pay cut to far less than the original $190,000. Hardly anyone makes it the approximately 9ish years to partnership because there are hardly any partners compared to the number of associates and there is a new crop of associates every year. That's not to say waiting does not cost or save you any money. If you can avoid significant debt in law school (which is a pretty big and important if) then you ought to be able to save quite a bit in Big Law. If not, you can pay back your debt quickly which is sort of like saving. I would say that the interest which accrues on those savings between when you leave Big Law and the three or so years later when your theoretical full time working 0L self left Big Law would approximate your advantage.
TLDR: Attending law school earlier won't get you more years at a Big Law salary in the event that you get Big Law, but it will make those years earlier. If you are smart and invest the money the interest will therefore start compounding earlier so it will be financially better.
Flip side: Kid 1 doesn't work, somehow survives on fairy dust in the meantime, kills the lsat and gets a scholarship. Assuming he's not still surviving on fairy dust at his new school, he encounters fees and racks up bills or loans to cover things that scholarships don't (which is everything except tuition and maybe fees). There might be a possibility of paid summer internship, but it doesnt pay the bills immediately, and is iffy at best.
Kid 2 does work, takes longer to kill the lsat. Gets the same scholarship, same internships and all, only 3 years later. Spent 3 years working. Saved some money, so he doesn't have to get loans to cover as much of his cost of living/ fees/ books, etc.
Which actually comes out better in their lives by the time they finish law school?
Sure, one is 31 and the other is 34. But that doesn't really matter much in the grand scheme of things.
Well I am sure you will say it does not matter, but if you don't have anything on your resume for an extended period of time, it looks bad. I get studying is important, but I can be sure that the admissions people would take a 170 over a 175 if that person has had work experience and has done well in it. Also, I have a background in finance right now, and I want to get into M&A law. I believe my work experience will end up helping me with interviews in the future because not only will I understand the numbers, but also the law. Obviously I still have to get a good LSAT score and do well in law school, but work experience is important. Look at Northwestern for example. The majority (70 percent) of their students have work experience. And northwestern is a T14.
I'm just not even sure what point you're trying to get across? Like, are you asking if you should take time off? You keep giving hypotheticals about ROI etc etc. But like... why? You said you want comment/feedback--are you trying to convince someone to stay home and study? The more I read the post the more confused I am lmao.
Agreed with what everyone else has already said and also I'm pretty sure I'd go insane if I studied for the LSAT all day every day
Ok so just to throw something new into the mix: I quit the job I hated to study for the summer. However, I anticipated this move and prepared for it in a way that most people can't... just because their jobs work differently than mine did. I was working in retail sales on commission. When you work on commission, 25% of your commission is withheld by the government because it is seen as a "bonus". When my tax return came in, I got a good amount of it back. It gave me enough to take the summer off. If that wasn't my situation, I would've had to spend a looonnngggg time saving money to take that time off.
Wow this seems to be a heavy thread. One that I find a bit ironic because I have actually been struggling with a decision the past week to leave my job. There were many variables to this but the main reason is the LSAT. I am 28 and for the past 5 years I have worked at a job that has done nothing more than pay the bills. This last year however I have learned more about myself and realized that money does not buy me happiness. But it pays the bills so it became a means to an end until I could get into law school. However, I have studied for the past year with very little progress because working full time and studying is the hardest thing to do. This is coming from someone who has worked since she was 15. I wasn’t someone who had the privilege of not working during undergrad. I had a full time job all 4 years. For one of those years I even worked an overnight job and after getting off at 7am I would head to my 8am class. Needless to say I have always done what I had to do to survive. But I have hit my limit.
This is why I understand what the OP is saying. A few months time off to study for a test that could literally turn into thousands of dollars in scholarship money is something to consider. Especially if law school is your true goal. I feel that most people like myself think it’s impossible to just up and quit a job because bills are due, you need food and pretty much everything in life cost money. But sometimes it wouldn’t hurt to push past that wall of no to a point where you say, if it is possible, then how could I do it? For me it came down to how much money do I have saved, how much do I need, and how long can I go without a job? The next step was when do I need to go back to work and how will I make money in the mean time? I am signed up for the September test. I have less than 2 months to get where I need to be and I want to give myself every possible chance to get there. If I can’t then at least I know I tried and at least I know I need more time. I know that the longer I allow my job to take priority of my life the longer I will be unhappy. It’s not always about how fast you want to get somewhere. It’s also about how long can I survive chasing things like money instead of my dreams. I won’t sugar coat things though. It is scary! Going from having a secure job to what ifs is like jumping out of an airplane. At first it’s scary! And for most people it sounds like the dumbest thing to ever do. But eventually you will remember you have a parachute, you will use it and reach the ground.
With all that being said I do think one thing to note is that I am not trying to get to the 170s and I have no interest in going to a T14 school. My passion is helping kids and becoming a child advocacy attorney. I just want to get a decent enough score to get into school and get a scholarship. I will not be making $190,000 right out of school and honestly maybe ever. So I know my best route is to reduce my loans as much as I can and that is by studying and giving my all to the LSAT. Also I just paid off my undergrad loans 2 weeks ago so that is a little less of a financial burden.
By no means am I saying anyone should up and quit their job and focus on the LSAT. I am just saying that there are more possibilities than many people think there are. If I saw this post last month I would agree with everyone else. I just hit a point in my life where I had to reevaluate my priorities, push past my fears and open myself up to those possibilities.
Congratulations on repaying your student loans! That must feel really good. Best of luck on your future test date! Your situation makes sense and of course everyone has a different situation and perspective.
Here's the other thing you should keep in mind - just cause you go to a T14 school doesn't mean you'll do well enough to land yourself an OCI for big law. You could quit work and study, sure, but I'm almost certain that you'll just pass the LSAT hurdle whereas the overworked paralegal was exposed to law and may do better in her or his first year enough to land that OCI. I know many people who did not go to a t14, did not get a 170 on their lsat (in fact, got in the 150s) but are in big law, are making 180k and it's only because they were the top 1% of their class their first year.
@username_hello That's not a fair comparison. You cannot compare a ten point discrepancy. Further, you should be comparing the 75 to the 25 percentiles. The difference between 170 and 160 is night and day. Not only that there is reason to believe that someone who is working with a coming story has a better chance of getting in with someone who had the numbers and nothing else. Law school is more than a numbers game.
@JustDoIt
Thanks for following up.
This is straight from JY in:
https://7sage.com/how-to-get-into-law-school/
“The one thing you need to know about how to get into law school
The answer can be summed up in four letters. LSAT. You need to demolish the LSAT. That's the one thing you need to know.
In the topsy-turvy world of law school applications, LSAT is king.
What about Personal Statements, Recommendations, Extracurriculars, Job Experience and Interviews? They make a difference, but not that much. If you have a lame-duck recommendation or a douchey personal statement, it can tank you. If you were the President of your home country it'll really help.
Most of the time these aren't going to make a big difference. At least not compared to the LSAT. Most of the time, you should put effort into making these shine only after you've taken the LSAT.“
Idk where you live but in my area you can make $40-50k as a legal assistant and paralegals make 60k+. A legal assistant job at a small company with bad pay would be $30k. A paralegal job at a small company with bad pay would be $50k.
Also, I worked part time over 3 school years, and full time during each winter/spring/summer break at a law firm just doing general admin...and made I think $10/hour...had I worked full time for a year that’s probably $15k after taxes. Not really sure how one would make $15k after taxes at an internship just over the summer. Even if that was the case, that money would ultimately go toward ones bachelors degree and living expenses, not to savings.
And, I don’t think anyone truly studies 40/hrs a week. And, I know many people who work full time who study even more per day than people who only work part time or not at all.
Furthermore, having a resume will help you get jobs during and after law school. If two students are comparable in their grades and personability, one would be more likely to hire the student with a resume. Its very difficult to trust that someone with little to no work experience is even capable of just showing up at 8am.
I am currently trying to find a paralegal/assistant/secretary job more than 32 hrs/week but less than 40, so I can get healthcare benefits but have a little more time to study/sleep. Mid-big law firms which pay well rarely hire part time, smaller firms don’t pay as well and the workload may be even more substantial at a smaller firm. It’s not easy to just minimize the hours you work.
Whoever it is that has their parents or significant other paying for their life while they study should adult adopt me so I can quit my job too.
I did quit my job to study for the LSAT full time, and so I can understand where OP is coming from with this thread. There's a lot of hostility towards the OP, but I do think that they have a point.
If you are able to take time off to study, I actually do think that it should be a consideration for a lot of people. I took ~4 months off from work to study, and pulled a 170+. Everyone is different, but I definitely wouldn't have been able to score as highly if I had been working (I have a finance/accounting background and the hours in my field are brutal and not conducive to studying for this exam).
Just judging from lawschoolnumbers, the 4 months that I took off has translated to around ~$50,000-~100,000 USD in scholarships. If I can improve my score by 3-4 points in July, then that will turn into $200,000+. That's post-tax as well. This is far more than I would've been able to make had I been working part/full time.
Also, it's not like the reason I was able to do this is because I come from a super privileged background. I made a lot of sacrifices in the past 5 years that have made this possible for me. For example I:
That said, choosing to quit to study for the LSAT is still a very personal choice that depends on a lot of factors. The things that made me make the decision were:
I knew that I could pull a 170+. At the time I made the decision to quit, I was BRing 178-180 and knew that I had the potential to score very highly. It was just a question of dedicating myself to the test and investing the time necessary to get my timed score up to match my BR.
My uGPA is very competitive, which makes me a more attractive scholarship candidate.
I only took 4 and a half months off of work, not 1 year+
For some people, quitting the LSAT to study actually makes a lot of financial sense. I don't think the OP deserves all of the hostility on this thread.
This is exactly where I am!!!
@"Seeking Perfection" said:
I like your post and I think you bring up a great point, but you might've understated it just a tad. A few years of extra savings from Big Law earlier in life can make an enormous difference.
Say we have two students who both score highly on their LSATs, and are able to attend UChicago on full-ride scholarships. The students are such that:
Student (A) is a K-JD starting law school at 22 years of age. Student (A) took 4 months off from work to study full-time for the LSAT, and in doing so burned through $4,000 dollars of savings.
Student (B) began working as a paralegal after graduating from undergrad, and the office they are in has grueling hours. These hours have interfered with their ability to adequately prepare for the LSAT. Nevertheless, after 3 years and several takes student (B) finally achieves a superb LSAT score.
Both students work Biglaw in NY for 3 years before moving on to a different job. They both save 20% of their income, investing mostly in equities with a compound annual interest rate of 8%.
At retirement age....
Student (A)'s savings from their time in Biglaw will equal approx. $3,370,000.00
Student (B)'s savings from their time in Biglaw will equal approx. $2,650,000.00
Now of course student (A) has an opportunity cost of spending that $4,000 back when they began school. Compounded for 43 years, the future value is approx $125,000.00
Even so, student (A) is still at a net gain of $600,000.00. That's future value though -- accounting for TMV gives a present value of around $22,000.00.
So essentially by spending down their savings and entering law school earlier, student (A) "earned" $600,000.00 more by retirement age just by virtue of beginning to save earlier.
And all of this is assuming that student (A) and student (B) have similar outcomes. What if student (B)'s work interfered so much that they never scored 175+ and instead paid full-ticket price to go to UChicago rather than a full scholarship? In such a scenario student (A) is coming out millions of dollars ahead of student (B).
Shout out to people getting offended by a legitimate strategy to do better, cash in those economic victimhood points on an anonymous forum
I got a little bit lucky, and was able to take the summer off. Took some planning. I took a summer course to qualify for government loans as a part of it, giving me a bit more freedom for a small return of time with one course. It's obviously not an option for everyone, but if it is something you can work out, I'd recommend it.
I don’t think anyone is scoffing at the idea of taking time off, but rather at OP’s seeming inability to understand why everyone doesn’t take the time off. As I’ve said, if you have savings or parents to pay for your time off, that is absolutely fantastic!! But that can’t be a consideration for everyone, which is why I’m confused about the purpose of the thread. I just don’t even know what it’s accomplishing.
i think you need to read OP's first two paragraphs again. he does not say "everyone" and he is merely trying to broach the topic of conversation about why some people who could quit their job, in fact, do not.
in doing so, the OP has already had many replies with people who have put WAYYY too much emphasis on the effect a short gap period will have on their chance of admissions. this could be especially useful because the most frequent posters on 7sage are people studying for the LSAT long term who have not been through the admissions process and, frankly, are spewing personal opinions about what the effect a gap would have based on speculation. after going through the admissions process myself, reading a variety of forums for the past year, and talking with admissions offices around the country / Q+A panels / books interviewing admissions officers, i have NEVER seen someone who under performed their numbers because they took time off to study for the LSAT. i'm not saying it has never happened, but i've read / heard admissions officers say that taking time off "to volunteer, travel, or even just relax" before starting law school is fine as long as you feel fully prepared to start it when you do. so, if they can see it as a positive and share those sentiments publicly, i can feel fairly confident that it would take an extraordinary situation for them to view it as a negative.
this has been one of the best threads on 7sage not related to specific LSAT instruction in a long time.
i was going to bring up compound interest too but you did such a great job i'll just smile at your example.
btw, i'm not someone who took 6months off to study for the LSAT but i am someone who wishes they would have last summer
I agree I don’t understand the purpose of the thread. As with pretty much anything in life, maximizing the amount of time you can take on something will give you the best results in the shortest period of time. This is obvious. Not everyone can do so bc they have responsibilities. I’m not really sure who this thread is addressed to bc not many people can just stop working.
Also, anyone who is mentioning living frugally during undergrad — not everyone realizes they want to go to law school during undergrad nor do they realize how much time lsat studying takes. And, living frugally while making probably minimum wage at a part time job...is not going to save much, if anything. If anything is saved it would go toward student loans.
People also need to save money FOR law school so even if you can take time off, this is just contributing to financial struggle DURING law school.
Just bc taking time off “always” increases ones score, doesn’t mean that it increases one score up to what they want. Going from a 140 diagnostic to a 163 on the test is great but it’s not great for someone who wants a t14.
Great to know for a lot of people commenting on here who probably haven’t entered the workforce — it’s very hard to get a job when you are not currently employed. Hands down you get 2x as much interviews when you’re looking for a job while you’re employed, rather than while you’re unemployed. Even if it’s a brief gap of unemployment. People who take a gap and then want to go back to work are going to have trouble finding a job.
This post just feels like conservatives yelling at poor people to just save money. In the US we don’t get free healthcare or education so idk why anyone would assume that the average person can just quit their job to study...on a basis of a possible way far future financial gain.
@"surfy surf" said:
Do a search for "quit job" on the 7sage forums and you'll find dozens of threads from students who are considering quitting their job for a short period of time to study for the LSAT. This is a real choice that many students can make, and it has a lot of pros and cons attached to it. I think a discussion like the one we're having on this thread is actually quite fruitful.
I mean, I can completely sympathize with the students who are not able to take off work to study for this exam. I think it's RIDICULOUS that this exam requires 500-1000+ study hours of preparation. I think it's CRIMINAL that LSAC continues to charge absurd amounts of money for test licensing which makes all prep material extremely expensive. And it's a straight up INSULT to the supposedly meritocratic admissions process that applicants are allowed to shell out $10,000+ for consulting packages from admission consulting companies. The entire LSAT is just one gigantic class barrier that unapologetically and unambiguously gives the middle finger to the less privileged in society.
But it's precisely for this reason that students can and should approach preparing for the exam in the best/most efficient ways possible. For those that can take time off work to study for the exam (and that is who the OP addressed this post to, no less no more), then it is an option that is definitely worthy of consideration. In purely financial terms, taking time off work to study for the LSAT can be well worth it -- that's why we're having this discussion.
This entire thread got me like...
https://media2.giphy.com/media/tyqcJoNjNv0Fq/giphy.gif
He's obviously not implying you should starve to death or be evicted if you don't have the needed funds. It also doesn't help answer the obvious point of the thread, which actually is relevant to my interests, which is "What are some of the benefits, and some of the downfalls, if you do in fact have this opportunity?" I see plenty of people who have this opportunity who don't even consider taking it. Maybe it's worth putting the idea in their mind, presenting them with another option? He even did some math to explain why it may be beneficial.
Doesn't sound like he's making that assumption at all. He's asking why people who have that chance may not. It's literally in the first sentence of his post. And within three posts, we had people playing class warfare. Doesn't sound like conservatives saying anything, but it's telling that that is where you take it.
This thread be like
"Hey, why don't we go to the ball game this weekend, that could be fun. Do you have any pros or cons about why we should do this?"
"Not everyone has the money to do that, so how can you even ask that question?"
More like why don’t you go to the ball game starting this weekend for an indefinite period of time
"Why do people settle for less and allow a 50-hour a week paralegal job (for example) prevent them from reaching their goals?
Financially, those 50 hours are much more valuable when used studying for the LSAT (considering how many hundreds of thousands of dollars you'll potentially save with a 170+ Lsat score)"
Financially, working 50 hours a week is much more valuable because it allows me to have food to put on a plate, and also a plate, and also a roof over my head in the kitchen where I can eat my plate of food.
It's not that folks who haven't quit their jobs aren't thinking about their goals. My goals require me not to be literally homeless. I can't care about hundreds of thousands of dollars in the future if I starve right now.
This reeks of privilege. I understand that the thread comes with the caveat of only applying to those who are financially able to do so, but so few people truly are, and it's not even a matter of "things will be tight but I won't buy my coffee from Starbucks daily and I'll make it through." This post vastly underestimates lower-class and middle-class life, and makes generalizations that sound like those of us forced to work simply don't want a good score badly enough.
-slow claps-
But still...I am not disagreeing that it is the most important consideration. That is 100% true. What I am disagreeing with is that it is the only consideration. That is not true. There are other parts of your application that are important too. Not only that, having a holistic application matters much more if you are a URM.
Puleeeze pass the popcorn!
hahaha!