Episode 56: Are Law Schools Responsible for Assuring You Have a Job After Graduation?

Nathan recommends adding something unusual to your morning coffee. Try it and look like a badass at your next brunch. (2:30)

David, a listener who graduated in 2006 with a degree in civil engineering, asks about his chances of being accepted into a good law school despite his cumulative GPA of 2.78. He is currently preparing to take the June LSAT after letting his 2009 score of 161 expire without applying to any schools. Ben uses the LSAT/GPA calculator to give David an estimation of his chances at admission. (9:15)

We discuss the importance of highlighting personality and “painting a picture” of yourself on your law school applications. Exhibit A: Cate Hall, a graduate of Yale Law School who quit a successful law career to become a professional poker player; she was recently interviewed on one of Nathan’s favorite podcasts, “Thinking Poker.” You can listen to that episode here. (26:00)

An article in the New York Times discusses Anna Alaburda, a 2008 graduate of Thomas Jefferson Law School who is charging the institution with inflating their employment stats to convince people to enroll in their program. The story prompts our discussion about the responsibility of a law school in their students’ future employability. (33:35)

Nathan’s heart skips a beat when Cate Hall, the aforementioned poker player, likes the tweet he wrote about her! Tweet Cate and beg her to come on our show. (51:30)

Listener Cordelia is preparing for the LSAT and is planning to purchase one of Nathan’s LSAT books to help but she doesn’t know which one to choose first. Nathan recommends starting with his primer Introducing the LSAT, a “quick and dirty” overview of the LSAT’s most common concepts and how to handle them, and then moving on to Cheating the LSAT, which walks the reader through one full test. (53:35)

We work on the official June 2007 LSAT, Question #17- a particularly useful flaw question in the Logical Reasoning section. Play along by downloading the free June 2007 LSAT here. (58:10)

Listen closely as we discuss the argument and you will hear even more authentic Costa Rican birdsongs! This episode features a less melodious species of bird (or maybe it’s a monkey?!) but will put you in a tropical mindset just the same.

Got questions you want us to answer in a future podcast? Send us an email! Follow us at @thinkinglsat and tweet us a question!

Take a listen and let us know what you think.


  1. Hi Ben and Nathan-

    I’m a new listener and love the podcasts so far!

    I work for a big 4 accounting firm doing litigation support / e-discovery management. Our clients are attorneys at BigLaw firms, and many of the partners at my own company were practicing law before coming to the business consulting side.

    What are your thoughts and/or strategy on approaching the attorneys (my clients) and the partners at my own firm to find out what their jobs/lives are like?

    My concerns here are that 1. the partners at my firm will be turned off by the fact that I am considering the legal path and as a result may leave the firm in the future and 2. the attorneys (clients) may tell my leadership about me reaching out and the consequences of that.

    Thanks so much!


    1. Hi Nick, thanks for listening. I would just ask them about their careers. If they even ask why you’re asking, just say that you’re “just curious” or that you’re “just thinking about your options down the road.” I don’t think that they’ll care — either the attorney-clients or the partners — especially if you seem genuinely interested in them and their careers. Most people don’t stay at their jobs forever, so it’s almost weird not to think about what’s next. You just don’t want to convey the sense that you’re planning to leave soon. That’s when people get nervous. As long as you keep your timeline vague and tone informal, it seems like you should be totally fine.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *