Fast track law school options

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea what I would allow someone to take 21 credit hours a semester but hey, that’s great.

I just want my kid to take 15!

Well, I graduated with a 4.0 as valedictorian so it can't have been all that problematic? People are different, some can handle more workload than others. Unsurprisingly, I was a very high biller when in biglaw. I can just work harder and longer than most people. It doesn't mean I'm better, it's just how I am wired. I also struggle to sleep more than 4 hours a night. It's innate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks to everyone for clarifying how the US system works. I guess every country has a system that has evolved out of how its tertiary education sector works and is funded. In countries with publicly funded universities, there is an incentive to deliver the education efficiently and keep students no longer than necessary. Even so, increased participation rates means they have often introduced some tuition fees or use international students to prop up their budgets. Entrance into popular or prestigious courses can also be very tough as limited public funds means the number of spaces may be limited. In the US, I imagine it is in the best interests of universities to keep students studying and paying fees for as long as possible. The mind boggles at how much money goes into the college system for each extra year of study.

College costs and universities trying to get students paying fees for as long as possible are completely irrelevant to your question. As PPs have explained, the US has a different system, using both case law and codified law, and requiring (to make the big bucks) more maturity and life experience than skipping undergrad would lead to.

Graduating early from undergrad is one way to save a year of tuition. Graduating early from undergrad is very different from skipping undergrad entirely, even if you can find a law school that would take such a student. Skipping is not recommended.

Go with an inexpensive undergrad - they are not that hard to find. Prestige of undergrad is not what matters; prestige of law school is.

[Anonymous]

Huh. I didn't think colleges or unis had valedictorians, other than Penn St. Good for you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks to everyone for clarifying how the US system works. I guess every country has a system that has evolved out of how its tertiary education sector works and is funded. In countries with publicly funded universities, there is an incentive to deliver the education efficiently and keep students no longer than necessary. Even so, increased participation rates means they have often introduced some tuition fees or use international students to prop up their budgets. Entrance into popular or prestigious courses can also be very tough as limited public funds means the number of spaces may be limited. In the US, I imagine it is in the best interests of universities to keep students studying and paying fees for as long as possible. The mind boggles at how much money goes into the college system for each extra year of study.

College costs and universities trying to get students paying fees for as long as possible are completely irrelevant to your question. As PPs have explained, the US has a different system, using both case law and codified law, and requiring (to make the big bucks) more maturity and life experience than skipping undergrad would lead to.

Graduating early from undergrad is one way to save a year of tuition. Graduating early from undergrad is very different from skipping undergrad entirely, even if you can find a law school that would take such a student. Skipping is not recommended.

Go with an inexpensive undergrad - they are not that hard to find. Prestige of undergrad is not what matters; prestige of law school is.

disagree - went to both undergrad and law school. definitely did not require 7 full years of education to be a good lawyer or have the necessary maturity. frankly law school is at least one year longer than it needs to be too. 3 years total of undergrad + law school would be fine if you absolutely knew what you wanted to do, and were OK with no fun electives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks to everyone for clarifying how the US system works. I guess every country has a system that has evolved out of how its tertiary education sector works and is funded. In countries with publicly funded universities, there is an incentive to deliver the education efficiently and keep students no longer than necessary. Even so, increased participation rates means they have often introduced some tuition fees or use international students to prop up their budgets. Entrance into popular or prestigious courses can also be very tough as limited public funds means the number of spaces may be limited. In the US, I imagine it is in the best interests of universities to keep students studying and paying fees for as long as possible. The mind boggles at how much money goes into the college system for each extra year of study.

College costs and universities trying to get students paying fees for as long as possible are completely irrelevant to your question. As PPs have explained, the US has a different system, using both case law and codified law, and requiring (to make the big bucks) more maturity and life experience than skipping undergrad would lead to.

Graduating early from undergrad is one way to save a year of tuition. Graduating early from undergrad is very different from skipping undergrad entirely, even if you can find a law school that would take such a student. Skipping is not recommended.

Go with an inexpensive undergrad - they are not that hard to find. Prestige of undergrad is not what matters; prestige of law school is.

I absolutely understand that diverging from what is an established path in the US is not advisable unless you're fairly exceptional (as some of the other posters clearly and commendably are). My comment was a reflection about how the different systems evolved.

But I don't what is this maturity and life experience you are referring to? You mean the fact a US law graduate is 2 years older than their equivalent in another country? Is it common that people are actually gaining valuable life experience. I know a number of people who went through law school here and my impression is that they were enjoying semesters abroad in Italy hanging out with other American college students or frequently partying with their friends. They were probably the exceptions.