Anonymous wrote:Good law schools need smarts but honestly no where near neurosurgery or Differential equations.

Anonymous wrote:Law school is much more of a grind than grad school. You seem very confused OP.

Anonymous wrote:After 3 years of working on PhD in history and serving as a TA, I dropped out and enrolled in law school. I was sick of the pettiness of academia and the likelihood of poor job prospects. I went to law school the following Fall. I was warned about cut-throat nature of law school but it was nothing compared to academia. It took me a little time to adjust because you need a different mindset. I was glad I made the jump.

Anonymous wrote:Law school is essentially the same as an undergrad degree, but USA determines social status by how many years of school you can afford, so they add extra years to professional degrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school is essentially the same as an undergrad degree, but USA determines social status by how many years of school you can afford, so they add extra years to professional degrees.

WTF are you talking about? I did four years at a SLAC and three at a T3 law school.

I think the PP's point is it's a first degree in the subject, not advanced study. On the other hand undergrad degrees include a lot of study outside the major, while the law student has three years of study in the area.

And yes in many countries law degrees are first degrees. There's no evidence that lawyers in say Britain or Australia are undereducated.

No one said that, but the training to be a British lawyer is actually longer - not the the three years plus bar exam. It's three years PLUS training for four years in chambers to be a solicitor for a total of seven years.

+1. At least six years to become a solicitor. https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/career-advice/becoming-a-solicitor#:~:text=without%20a%20degree-,How%20long%20it%20takes,to%20follow%20a%20legal%20career.

At a minimum it is 3 years of undergrad degree, one year of law school (which is a professional skills based program) and then 2 years of work in a law firm as a trainee OR one year of pupillage as a barrister. So 5 years minimum including undergrad (6 to be a solicitor)- that is shorter than the US progression with less time in school.
- signed, English solicitor. In terms of training to be a lawyer, I think it is a better system because of the practical component. But there are trade offs.

Whatever. It is longer than in the US

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Law school is essentially the same as an undergrad degree, but USA determines social status by how many years of school you can afford, so they add extra years to professional degrees.

WTF are you talking about? I did four years at a SLAC and three at a T3 law school.

I think the PP's point is it's a first degree in the subject, not advanced study. On the other hand undergrad degrees include a lot of study outside the major, while the law student has three years of study in the area.

And yes in many countries law degrees are first degrees. There's no evidence that lawyers in say Britain or Australia are undereducated.

No one said that, but the training to be a British lawyer is actually longer - not the the three years plus bar exam. It's three years PLUS training for four years in chambers to be a solicitor for a total of seven years.

+1. At least six years to become a solicitor. https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/career-advice/becoming-a-solicitor#:~:text=without%20a%20degree-,How%20long%20it%20takes,to%20follow%20a%20legal%20career.

At a minimum it is 3 years of undergrad degree, one year of law school (which is a professional skills based program) and then 2 years of work in a law firm as a trainee OR one year of pupillage as a barrister. So 5 years minimum including undergrad (6 to be a solicitor)- that is shorter than the US progression with less time in school.
- signed, English solicitor. In terms of training to be a lawyer, I think it is a better system because of the practical component. But there are trade offs.

But they get paid during their apprenticeships with the law firms. It’s three years of uni undergrad in law then training which is work where you get paid. Or if you didn’t do law in undergrad you ca do a one year conversion course then do training.

I’m an American attorney but I think the British system is better because you go into less debt and you get to try out different kinds of law during training before committing to one.

[b]


so what? that's not the point of the thread. are you done splitting hairs?