Ti Malice wrote:Big Dog wrote:However, one big concern that hasn't yet been addressed is the impact of the residual benefits of having HLS on your resume, way down the road. I've heard many times that after your first job, your school doesn't matter too much. But I imagine this doesn't apply (as much) to HLS graduates.
Correct. H is the gift that keeps on giving. While the shine should revert to the mean over time, it does not. To me, H is with the $ delta.
Any actual data for this? Something showing that, on average and in terms of career outcomes, H is worth the $210K in debt, accumulated interest, and the gains unrealized due to being unable to invest some or all of that money?
I mean, I wish this were true, because if it were true for HLS, then it would be true for my school. But this really smells like nothing more than ignorant 0L prestige obsession.
It's a false correlation issue, I think. Federal clerkships, not school name, are what stand out in your career in law for a long time, according to what I've been told. They carry the height of prestige. Where you go to school will fade a lot more quickly than who you clerked for and what circuit it was on (and if its SCOTUS, then that will last forever). So this could imply that since HYS have higher clerkship numbers, their name and brand carry you farther via greater opportunity at these clerkships. As noted, Chicago has 3-4% less clerks than H. This is your long term "residual benefit", IMO. Yale, of course, has a massive "prestige" benefit by this false correlation via its dominating clerkship numbers.
If you go directly to work for THE SAME firm from Harvard or Chicago, "down the road", not much difference to speak of.
edit: this is just one proposition, not a definitive claim that this is necessarily the only cause accounting for the phenomenon