help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

Considering the facts, pick one:

GWU
5
5%
Texas
32
31%
Michigan
67
64%
 
Total votes: 104

zanyventer
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 1:29 am

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby zanyventer » Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:53 am

i found the following pretty helpful. it's from a comment on TaxProf Blog:

I filled out the survey and scored UT low, primarily because the career services office is an embarrassment. After I struck out at OCI despite top 1/3 grades + journal(bad year to want corporate), the only guidance they offered was to spam resumes to small firms on Martindale (that probably pay $50-65k/yr). They were no help at all in terms of connecting me with decent Texas firms that still needed to fill their classes, or advising me on how to break into good firms outside of Texas. Not even a hint that maybe I needed to develop an “interest” in litigation if I wanted to get hired. Granted, I do bear some blame as ultimately I was the one who did the interviews, and my grades could have been better in the absence of some rough events in my personal life. But it says a lot of bad things about a law school when the CSO is entirely unconcerned with placing students with solid academic credentials in decent firms. It wasn’t as if I was being a selective prestige whore either. I would have been perfectly happy in a mid-market firm paying $80k+ as long as the work was decent.

That said, to place UT below the other Texas schools is outright silly. I would have needed to be top ten percent at Baylor or SMU to get the interviews I got being top 1/3 at UT. I scored UT low because my other options were mid-T14 schools, and I now wish I had paid full price there instead of taking in-state tuition + academic scholarships at UT. I think my results would have been different coming from a better school, and I have little doubt that a better school’s CSO would have been more helpful if I found myself in a similar situation there. Comparing UT to other Texas schools though, it is no contest. I would not have attended law school had my only options been Baylor/SMU/UH or worse because the price/placement ratio indicates that the odds are against earning a good return on an investment in one of those schools.

Posted by: UT 3L | Aug 25, 2008 7:20:12 AM

User avatar
Tangerine Gleam
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:43 pm

+1 to thesealocust's post.

Michigan if your goals aren't Texas and Texas alone. Worth the extra money for sure.

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby FunkyJD » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:01 pm

nealric wrote:
If you want to have a decent shot at biglaw in DC, but would be okay with a good government gig in DC, and still be as competitive as anyone for biglaw in Texas


Lol at the idea that you can just waltz into a "good government gig" in DC from UT.


Yeah, Texas just sucks ass in DC. No prestige of any note.

Here's an example of a UT law grad sucking in DC:
http://www.utexas.edu/law/news/2009/031 ... wship.html

Here's an example of sorry UT compared to other law schools for Supreme Court clerkships. Yes, UMich did better, but notice how Georgetown, Duke, and Penn blew lower-ranked UT out of the water.
http://www.leiterrankings.com/jobs/2000 ... erks.shtml

Two partners and five associates at Williams & Connolly, a horrible litigation firm. (By comparison, UMich has five partners and two associates.)

Argument is not that Texas places better than UMich in DC. It doesn't and won't. Argument is that Texas holds its own in DC enough rep wise for OP to choose it over UMich if he has other considerations.

User avatar
chadwick218
Posts: 1337
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:15 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby chadwick218 » Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:06 pm

I faced a similar decision last year deciding b/w NU and UT (in-state). I ultimatley decided to attend NU, but in part b/c I was peeved that UT substantially increased tuition for the Class of 2012 relative to the Class of 2011. Although UT certainly has the strongest ties to biglaw in Texas, I do feel at times though that NU gives me some sense of diversity. Indeed, not everyone can come from UT.

User avatar
FlightoftheEarls
Posts: 857
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby FlightoftheEarls » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:48 pm

FunkyJD wrote:
nealric wrote:
If you want to have a decent shot at biglaw in DC, but would be okay with a good government gig in DC, and still be as competitive as anyone for biglaw in Texas


Lol at the idea that you can just waltz into a "good government gig" in DC from UT.


Yeah, Texas just sucks ass in DC. No prestige of any note.

Here's an example of a UT law grad sucking in DC:
http://www.utexas.edu/law/news/2009/031 ... wship.html

Here's an example of sorry UT compared to other law schools for Supreme Court clerkships. Yes, UMich did better, but notice how Georgetown, Duke, and Penn blew lower-ranked UT out of the water.
http://www.leiterrankings.com/jobs/2000 ... erks.shtml

Two partners and five associates at Williams & Connolly, a horrible litigation firm. (By comparison, UMich has five partners and two associates.)

Argument is not that Texas places better than UMich in DC. It doesn't and won't. Argument is that Texas holds its own in DC enough rep wise for OP to choose it over UMich if he has other considerations.

Showing that some people from UT have done well in DC doesn't mean that Texas has a reputation in DC (although I agree the school probably does), but your statement completely avoids the issue that nealric was referring to (and I don't really know why you brought that up). To clarify what he's saying: it's stupid to assume you can just waltz into a government job in DC if things don't work out. They are not easy to come by, even from great schools. They are still considered very prestigious and it'd be unwise to just assume that government jobs are just kind of fall-backs for people who don't make the biglaw cut. That's not how it works.

tamlyric
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby tamlyric » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:59 pm

Perhaps this has already been addressed, but it seems to me the question for OP is whether the short- or long-term goal is more important. Is it more important to practice in DC for awhile? Or is it more important to end up in Texas in the long-run? If the former, then it's probably worth going to UMich, ensuring DC, but running the risk that s/he will not make the requisite connections in the Texas legal world. If the latter is more important, then it's probably worth going to UT, ensuring the requisite connections in Texas, but running the risk that s/he will not find inroads to DC from UT.

If it were any easy decision, OP wouldn't have asked the question. I think both UMich and UT are great options, but it seems to me that OP has to figure out which of the two goals is the most important to her/him.

Apologies if this just repeats what has been said elsewhere.

User avatar
Joga Bonito
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby Joga Bonito » Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:00 pm

im_blue wrote:The bottom line is that Michigan is certainly worth $62k more than Texas, and GWU shouldn't even be in the equation. If you're worried about the SO, you can fly DTW-DCA for about $250. It's a 1.5-hour flight so you could probably do this every 2-3 weekends. You could even spend 3L as a visiting student at GULC or GWU, so you're really only away for 18 months (2 x 9 months).

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: help me choose (michigan v texas v gwu)

Postby FunkyJD » Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:13 pm

FlightoftheEarls wrote:Showing that some people from UT have done well in DC doesn't mean that Texas has a reputation in DC (although I agree the school probably does), but your statement completely avoids the issue that nealric was referring to (and I don't really know why you brought that up). To clarify what he's saying: it's stupid to assume you can just waltz into a government job in DC if things don't work out. They are not easy to come by, even from great schools. They are still considered very prestigious and it'd be unwise to just assume that government jobs are just kind of fall-backs for people who don't make the biglaw cut. That's not how it works.


I understand what nealric was saying. And I never meant that OP would "waltz," shimmy, or foxtrot into a government position from UT. [Though it's possible he could moonwalk into one.] My point is that if OP goes to Texas and does well, he has a chance to find a decent job in DC. Not a guarantee, of course not, but a chance. As I stated, Michigan's rep in DC is better, but UT can give him an opportunity.

OP will have to decide what is best for him, given all of his competing interests. I stand by my feeling that Michigan isn't worth the difference, given all of OP's goals -- though others obviously disagree, which is fine. I do have a personal bias against racking up thousands in additional debt unless it's an no-brainer to assume it, which I don't believe it is. If the argument was Columbia versus UT, maybe I'd feel differently. That's my judgment. But OP can decide, and I wish him luck.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 1 guest