4 Financial Benefits Of Part Time Law School

If you're new here, you may want to learn what this site is about or check out the most popular articles. If you like what you see, make sure to sign up for email updates or subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

If you’re not sure you can afford law school, look into part time programs. With part-time law school programs, you can continue to work full time and you go to law school at night. Because you’re still working full time, you have some financial advantage over students who are going full time.

1. You can contribute to retirement. Because you’ll still be earning an income, you can continue to contribute to your retirement account. While not contributing regularly for a few years may seem like not a big deal, the power of compound interest and the market may cause you to lose out on thousands of dollars in your retirement fund.
2. You still might have access to health insurance. It’s a sad fact, but most students don’t have access to affordable health insurance. When you or a member of your family gets sick or injured, medical bills can set you back financially. Hopefully, with your job you have access to health insurance.
3. You can take out fewer loans. You can offset the costs of your legal education by working. Instead of having to take out tens of thousands of dollars in loans for living expenses, you only need to borrow what you’ll need to pay for tuition. If you make lots of money, you might be able to get away without taking any loans out.
4. Flexible entrance requirements. If you didn’t do that well on the LSAT or have a dismal GPA, you might look into to part-time programs. Usually they’re much more lenient in admission standards. If you want to see if law school’s the right thing for you, with out making too much of a commitment in money and time, then a part-time program might be right for you.

What do you all think? Are there any other financial benefits of going to law school part time? Or do you think part time law school will actually hurt you financially? Later this week, I’ll be posting on the financial pitfalls of part time law school, so I’d love to have your input.

If you enjoyed this post, then make sure to subscribe to my RSS Feed.

[tags]law school, legal, debt, personal finance[/tags]

Tags:

Why not subscribe? Here's what you're missing out on!

• 5 Financial Pitfalls of Part Time Law School
• 6 Reasons Why You Should Be a Government Lawyer
• Best of…

12 Comments

1. Ben on 25.05.2007 at 05:52 (Reply)

   Some employers also provide tuition benefits, which further defer costs. University employment - particularly at the school in which you’re taking classes - sometimes means slicing half or more off the cost of tuition.

2. strange bird on 25.05.2007 at 09:10 (Reply)

   Drawbacks: not all schools have part-time programs. Most higher ranked schools don’t have part-time programs. Many traditional legal employers look down on part-time programs. And so what you may save in the cost of attendance, you may lose in future earnings. (I’m sure you were going to talk about that, too, though!)

3. The Frugal Law Student on 25.05.2007 at 09:57 (Reply)

   Ben-
   Good call. I know several of the part time students at my school who are getting help with tuition from their employer. I’m sure that’s helping out quite a bit.

4. The Frugal Law Student on 25.05.2007 at 10:03 (Reply)

   Strange Bird-
   Thanks for your input. You’re right about many traditional legal employers looking down on part-time programs. However, do you think that stigma is starting to disappear? More and more people are changing careers mid-life. As younger people start replacing the older “Establishment” attorneys, I think the stigma of part-timers will go away.

   However, for now, I agree that part-time attendance can cost you in future income.

5. Ben on 25.05.2007 at 10:08 (Reply)

   @ strange bird:

   Good points, though I disagree with some –

   I don’t really think it makes sense to say that a drawback of a part-time program is that not all schools have them. If you’re weighing the pros and cons of choosing a part-time program… you’re likely considering schools that have them. The number of programs doesn’t speak to their merit, individually or as a whole.

   As for many high ranking schools not having them, true enough, but not because they’re high-ranked… because most schools in general don’t have them. Having a part-time program or not doesn’t speak to the value of the school as a whole. I suppose it depends on how “higher-ranked” is defined. Top 10? OK, no part-time, but you’re also creating a small sample size concern. Top 15, top 20, top 35 are comparatively higher-ranked than the rest, and that bags a lot more part-time programs.

   Finally, on employment afterwards, I’m openly curious about that scenario. I’ve heard: a) PT candidates are looked down upon, b) PT candidates are treated equally because their program was equal to the FT program, c) PT candidates are treated better because they had to juggle more and thus already know a lot of skills they’ll need in the workplace.

   An alternate to (c) is that if they worked at a firm or other legal employer, they have perhaps more experience than the typical full-time student out of law school.

   Like I said, I’m curious. Is there evidence to point to any of these as the correct, or more correct answer? Is it just based on anecdotal experiences? On what basis do people say what they say about employment?

6. strange bird on 25.05.2007 at 10:27 (Reply)

   Ben, you might be right that not all schools having them is not a drawback. I imagine, though, that a lot of part-timers are law students with families, which (I assume) means that they (sometimes) have to look in a more limited geographical area. If there are not a lot of law schools in your area, then that might be a problem.

   As for higher ranked schools not having them–if you have the credentials to get into a top tier school, but you want a part-time program, you would have a hard time doing both. I didn’t mean to imply that the presence (or lack) of a pt program says anything about the quality of the school! I just mean that if you could get into a top ten school, you’d have to sacrifice the ranking if you wanted a part time program. Obviously this doesn’t apply to everyone.

   Finally, I have absolutely no evidence about employment afterwards. Based on what I’ve read here and there, it sounds like law remains a very traditional profession, and non-traditional paths generally frowned upon. I think there are a few points in either direction. Employers may assume that a part-timer did not have the credentials to get into a full-time program. Also, it’s a less traditional path, which may make some employers suspicious. BUT, if a new graduate has significant work experience that will help make them a better lawyer, that might not hurt with the majority of employers (though you would be hard-pressed to convince me that the elite firms are seriously considering part-time law students… again, though, that is not everyone’s goal).

7. Ben on 25.05.2007 at 10:33 (Reply)

   @The Frugal Law Student:

   Ah, didn’t see your post before I posted. So it’s an age thing? Older, “establishment” people who either don’t understand or trust a part-time program?

8. Ben on 25.05.2007 at 10:36 (Reply)

   @strange bird
   Thanks for clarifying. The age thing Frugal pointed out along with your thoughts have given me a lot to think about, particularly the idea that it may be assumed that a part-timer is a part-timer because he lacked the credentials to be full-time. The onus of showing why one chose part-time status would definitely be on the student.

9. The Frugal Law Student on 26.05.2007 at 09:13 (Reply)

   Ben-
   I could see older people looking down on part time programs more than younger attorneys. Older attorney’s put a lot of stock in tradition and going to law school full time is the traditional thing to do. However, as Strange Bird said, law is a VERY conservative field, so I don’t think we should count on the perception of part time school changing any time soon.

10. 5 Financial Pitfalls of Part Time Law School | The Frugal Law Student on 29.05.2007 at 14:09

    […] you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting! Last week, we discussed some of the financial benefits of attending part time law programs. Today, we discuss some of the […]

11. Jon on 21.04.2008 at 12:34 (Reply)

    I would argue that a Part-Time student who made the decision to attend school part-time while working full-time should be perceived admirably. If I were a law firm employer & I’m interviewing a prospect that attended law school part-time while maintaining a professional career, I would be so much more intrigued by them compared to someone who went FT but had zero work experience. If you can juggle the demands of school & work simultaneously, I’d argue that speaks volumes about the individual sitting in front of you…especially when the prospect went PT so he/she graduated with zero loan debt, took advantage of precious 401k contribution years, etc.. Obviously, not everyone will have the same “standards” when hiring new employees, but I would have a hard time believing a part timer with professional work experience whom attended PT school because they were not interested in carrying large amounts of debt as many of their peers do, would be looked down upon.

    1. Julieta on 09.05.2008 at 17:18 (Reply)

       Although some have said before me that PT law students may get “looked down upon,” one has to take other things into consideration —

       If there is a position at a prestigious law firm and the selection has been narrowed down to two students, no matter what type of program they are enrolled in, I would bet anything that the person who receives the position would have the higher of the two GPAs, assuming that everything else on their resume is comparable (law review, moot court, different law associations, and also law clerkships if applicable).

       If a PT student is able to have an excellent GPA, I would think that he has just as much a chance of getting great job offers than would a FT student with the same credentials.

       I understand that it might be true that some employers want things to be traditional, but hey, if the person has an awesome GPA AND previous job experience, it certainly cannot hurt. Law firms, no matter how traditional, are also businesses and see things in terms of dollars and cents –”which candidate is going to better increase revenue, etc.” I cannot imagine a law firm hiring a FT student with a lower GPA over a PT student SIMPLY for the fact that one finished in less time (when they both learn the exact same material).

       I would think that the important thing that a PT student needs to focus on is maintaining good standing in order to show that he can be just as focused as any FT student and to quit worrying about the program that he is enrolled in –a lot of students enter the PT program having had the excellent LSAT scores and GPA necessary to be enrolled in the FT program but see the financial benefits of leaving law school debt-free and I’m sure that employers take this into account as well.

       Another thing to take into account:
       What if a PT student is working as an accountant and wants to go into Tax Law? I would assume that an employer would see his previous experience as a benefit rather than a disadvantage. There are many fields where previous experience DOES help, no matter what program into which you were enrolled.

Leave a comment