| Topic Name: |
Roger Williams anyone? |
| Message Name: |
Just read the fine print |
| Date Posted: |
12/05/2001 |
| In Reply To: |
Although one sees some message posters complain about Roger Williams' programs from time to time,
I have never known anyone personally who went there. A few things about Roger Williams do concern me, though. Here you have a school with a 21K per annum tuition load, which may make
the cost of attending with room and board over 90K.
Yet the median income in the private sector for grads looks like it's about 36K.
I haven't run an inflation calculator on RI income levels, but I don't think of RI as so inexpensive as to make 36K substantially more attractive there than in other places. With the same scores and GPA, or ideally slightly better scores and GPA than the low-admit scores for RW, one can go to any of a number of public schools with equal or higher median incomes, in parts of the country I generally consider a little less expensive, and get out with far less debt and at least equal job prospects. I don't obsess too much about entry level salaries--heck, my own entry level salary was increased by 20% the next year, and 50% (i.e., cumulatively from entry to year 3) by the third year. This is not at all uncommon in upmarket times, and something nearly as good happens to many (but far from all) associates in even downmarket times. But my point is that if earning a living practicing law is one's goal, and one is in 3rd tier/4th tier territory, then one should focus on a low tuition school with good local hiring in a workable job market, rather than attending a high tuition school. A lot of public schools also have 35-50K median entry level salaries, but tuition levels which permit debt loads of less than 50K, cost of living included.
Seems to me it's a math problem. All that said, if I really wanted to be a lawyer, and had to be in RI for other reasons, I would not shy away from Roger Williams. But it comes down to the same thing--in all law schools, but in particular at lower ranked ones, you have to really want to practice law to do it. Otherwise, law school is a waste of your time, because you can earn well with less stress in other professions, and law is a demanding profession. I just finished a November in which I tried a
binding arbitration in TX and a jury trial in CA back to back. They both went extremely well, and I had the novel sensation of getting both decisions in my clients' favor on the same day last Friday. That was a pinnacle day, but let's also put it in human terms--all my Thanksgiving weekend was lost to exhibit organization except Tgiving day itself. All the weekend before Tgiving was lost to looking up law and regs to help me impeach the other side's position prior to the resumption on Tuesday of my arbitration. I had to interrupt my arb preparation to take a quick Sunday/Monday trip across the country to take a final quick expert depo for the CA trial. If I didn't want to do what I do, I'd be miserable now, as I try to rest away from a week of trial all day, and work on motions in other cases most nights (heck, I nearly had to miss watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer). So any law school is worth it only if you really want to be a lawyer. OTOH, when you get a result on Friday morning that will let your clients perform needed repairs on their home, and get a result on Friday afternoon that, if affirmed, will materially assist your clients with helping their business recover from a loss, then it all seems worth it, somehow. For that matter, when you know you've done all you can do to put your clients' case forward, even that has a good feeling to it, regardless of result. I guess this ramble all comes down to: check the numbers, and "worth it" depends on how you value being in a stressful but rewarding service profession.
|
| Message: |
All one needs to do is to read the posts from the school itself.
|
|
