Harvard v. Yale v. Hamilton v. Rubenstein Forum

[twistedwrister]

^^ Congrats -- you've got amazing options. U. Chicago should certainly be in the running because of the $$$, but Leiter's obviously biased, so take what he says with a grain of salt. According to Leiter's own rankings, Yale destroys Chicago (and every other law school) for academia:

http://leiterrankings.com/new/2011_LawTeachers.shtml

And overall "faculty quality":

http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml

According to one source, in 2010, 18 YLS grads and 3 Chicago grads were hired as new law professors:

http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2 ... -2010.html

Chicago's a great school, and I don't know how you can turn down that huge scholarship, but it's not on par with Yale when it comes to academia. Also, did you consider NYU? With Dworkin, Waldron, etc., we have the best law & philosophy faculty in the country (again, according to Leiter himself: http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml)

[drylo]

^^ Congrats -- you've got amazing options. U. Chicago should certainly be in the running because of the $$$, but Leiter's obviously biased, so take what he says with a grain of salt. According to Leiter's own rankings, Yale destroys Chicago (and every other law school) for academia:

http://leiterrankings.com/new/2011_LawTeachers.shtml

And overall "faculty quality":

http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml

According to one source, in 2010, 18 YLS grads and 3 Chicago grads were hired as new law professors:

http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2 ... -2010.html

Chicago's a great school, and I don't know how you can turn down that huge scholarship, but it's not on par with Yale when it comes to academia. Also, did you consider NYU? With Dworkin, Waldron, etc., we have the best law & philosophy faculty in the country (again, according to Leiter himself: http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml)

That's all true, but you can't necessarily infer a causal relationship. So more Yalies go straight into academia than Chicago students... but is some of that because more people who want to go straight into academia choose Yale? (... not to mention the fact that the Rubenstein is brand new--and awesome) I am just saying that while you should definitely look at the outcomes for the students from these schools, what they actually choose to do does not necessarily reflect what they could have chosen to do. And, like I said, Chicago is going to steal many more people from Yale than they have in the past with the Rubenstein.

[oxford_don]

^^ Congrats -- you've got amazing options. U. Chicago should certainly be in the running because of the $$$, but Leiter's obviously biased, so take what he says with a grain of salt. According to Leiter's own rankings, Yale destroys Chicago (and every other law school) for academia:

http://leiterrankings.com/new/2011_LawTeachers.shtml

And overall "faculty quality":

http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml

According to one source, in 2010, 18 YLS grads and 3 Chicago grads were hired as new law professors:

http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2 ... -2010.html

Chicago's a great school, and I don't know how you can turn down that huge scholarship, but it's not on par with Yale when it comes to academia. Also, did you consider NYU? With Dworkin, Waldron, etc., we have the best law & philosophy faculty in the country (again, according to Leiter himself: http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml)

That's all true, but you can't necessarily infer a causal relationship. So more Yalies go straight into academia than Chicago students... but is some of that because more people who want to go straight into academia choose Yale? (... not to mention the fact that the Rubenstein is brand new--and awesome) I am just saying that while you should definitely look at the outcomes for the students from these schools, what they actually choose to do does not necessarily reflect what they could have chosen to do. And, like I said, Chicago is going to steal many more people from Yale than they have in the past with the Rubenstein.

Leiter's position was that even though Yale produces more academics, that does not mean that Chicago is just as capable of producing academics. Academic hiring with a straight JD is about pedigree and publishing. On the pedigree issue, schools like Chicago grads and like to hire Chicago grads. Again, not as many are out on the market so the figures would be skewed towards Yale. On the publishing issue, you are just as capable of doing this at Chicago as you are at Yale. Publishing depends on the academic environment and having accessible faculty--all things that Chicago has. With the self-selection of academics towards Yale I think the numbers obscure the fact that someone can do everything necessary to enter academia at Chicago (and to a lesser extent Columbia, Stanford, Harvard...)

[The Real Jack McCoy]

^^ Congrats -- you've got amazing options. U. Chicago should certainly be in the running because of the $$$, but Leiter's obviously biased, so take what he says with a grain of salt. According to Leiter's own rankings, Yale destroys Chicago (and every other law school) for academia:

http://leiterrankings.com/new/2011_LawTeachers.shtml

And overall "faculty quality":

http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml

According to one source, in 2010, 18 YLS grads and 3 Chicago grads were hired as new law professors:

http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2 ... -2010.html

Chicago's a great school, and I don't know how you can turn down that huge scholarship, but it's not on par with Yale when it comes to academia. Also, did you consider NYU? With Dworkin, Waldron, etc., we have the best law & philosophy faculty in the country (again, according to Leiter himself: http://www.leiterrankings.com/new/2010_ ... pact.shtml)

That's all true, but you can't necessarily infer a causal relationship. So more Yalies go straight into academia than Chicago students... but is some of that because more people who want to go straight into academia choose Yale? (... not to mention the fact that the Rubenstein is brand new--and awesome) I am just saying that while you should definitely look at the outcomes for the students from these schools, what they actually choose to do does not necessarily reflect what they could have chosen to do. And, like I said, Chicago is going to steal many more people from Yale than they have in the past with the Rubenstein.

Leiter's position was that even though Yale produces more academics, that does not mean that Chicago is just as capable of producing academics. Academic hiring with a straight JD is about pedigree and publishing. On the pedigree issue, schools like Chicago grads and like to hire Chicago grads. Again, not as many are out on the market so the figures would be skewed towards Yale. On the publishing issue, you are just as capable of doing this at Chicago as you are at Yale. Publishing depends on the academic environment and having accessible faculty--all things that Chicago has. With the self-selection of academics towards Yale I think the numbers obscure the fact that someone can do everything necessary to enter academia at Chicago (and to a lesser extent Columbia, Stanford, Harvard...)

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archi ... iring.html

Here are the numbers to back that up. The fact that Yale dominates the legal hiring market has a lot to do with the sheer number of its grads who pursue academia out of Yale--almost as many as out of Harvard. I can think of three reasons for the above figures, all of which probably have some truth to them: 1) students interested in academia self-select into Yale 2) Yale/the Yale culture encourages its students to pursue academia 3) students at lower ranked schools don't feel as though they can get the top academic jobs. I doubt #3 is much of a factor at Chicago, given Chicago's traditional prestige in the academic market.

Though I'm not sure where you get the idea that Chicago bests Harvard and Stanford for academia, particularly when you start looking at the elite placements.

[jmkelly]

With the self-selection of academics towards Yale I think the numbers obscure the fact that someone can do everything necessary to enter academia at Chicago (and to a lesser extent Columbia, Stanford, Harvard...)

Why to a lesser extent?

[oxford_don]

[]

[BlueDiamond]

has anyone suggested a retake yet?

[USAIRS]

I can't truly know, but from my own experience and discussing with others their comparative experiences at other schools, Brian Leiter's view with respect to the academic route is accurate. Chicago is really set up well to allow virtually anyone who is seriously interested in academia to build up a good CV. Key aspects:

Accessible professors - It really seemed like any professor was available for coffee or lunch, and they were enthusiastic about engaging you personally on virtually any topic. And, it was incredibly easy to get into seminars and classes with the most reputable professors. Also, insanely easy to become an RA and help top professors in their publications.

Publishing - Chicago had (and maybe still has) a requirement of two major papers that had to be publishable quality. I know Harvard had something similar, but from the descriptions I've heard it seemed less stringent. Also, very easy to find professors in your area of interest who actually give a shit about you and are willing to mentor you on a special project. When I use the term, "give a shit", I mean that they won't just sign off on stuff, they will tear it to pieces if that is what's necessary to make it worth something.

Pedigree - I knew a few people who were serious about teaching, meaning they came to Chicago for the specific purpose of doing it or that they focused on it almost exclusively, and it seemed to me they were all successful. It was hard work, because they were serious about finishing above median and publishing etc., but the people who were serious simply put in the work, listened to their mentors, and did not have a problem landing in first-tier tenure track positions. At the end of the day, though, it wasn't just about grades. They published and did whatever else it was they were advised to do. I won't even say they were the top of the class. The people who were top of the class by and large clerked and/or went on to be attorneys. academia and practitioner are just two different career paths.

At the end of the day, you have to show you can produce to go into academia, but it just really helps to be around top notch academics who will mentor you. The whole purpose of that meat-market thing is to try and figure out who the real producers are and who will actually add something to the school. Chicago has been making a big mistake, in my mind, focusing on placing students into law firms. But the infrastructure is still there for academia, and when I was there it seemed like the school primarily existed to teach to the future academics or law clerks.


By the way, had I known that you were intending on being an attorneyin Chi-town and so networked in, I would have actually told you that your best route to AUSA there would probably be to attend Chicago and interen at the Chicago USAO during the year. Really helps to get your foot in the door.

[The Real Jack McCoy]

With the self-selection of academics towards Yale I think the numbers obscure the fact that someone can do everything necessary to enter academia at Chicago (and to a lesser extent Columbia, Stanford, Harvard...)

Why to a lesser extent?

Probably could/should have left Harvard off that list. I was referring to rest of the T14 because I think Chicago is uniquely strong amongst non-HYS schools in academia given its class size, faculty, and reputation. My own impression having visited Harvard is that Chicago may be a better environment for producing academics, though the degree carries less prestige than Harvard.

Yah, I completely agree--the weight of the Harvard name is probably balanced by the superiority of having a small class size/close connections with (very strong) faculty/easier mentoring opportunities.

Good luck with your decision.

[jmkelly]

Yah, I completely agree--the weight of the Harvard name is probably balanced by the superiority of having a small class size/close connections with (very strong) faculty/easier mentoring opportunities.

Good luck with your decision.

I have no experience of Chicago, so I'll take your word for it. But, speaking as a current hls student, I'm not sure how it could be significantly better than harvard for faculty contact / mentoring for the people who want it. Sure, you have to seek it out, probably to a greater extent than at small schools, but if you're not willing to do that you're probably not going to make it as an academic anyway.

For the OP, it seems to me that Chicago would be a bad idea unless you're extremely debt averse, but I'd take it over columbia if you are. Otherwise, there's a small group of people for whom it makes sense to take harvard over yale, but it looks like you've already ruled that out, so you should go with yale.

[rundoxierun]

Yah, I completely agree--the weight of the Harvard name is probably balanced by the superiority of having a small class size/close connections with (very strong) faculty/easier mentoring opportunities.

Good luck with your decision.

I have no experience of Chicago, so I'll take your word for it. But, speaking as a current hls student, I'm not sure how it could be significantly better than harvard for faculty contact / mentoring for the people who want it. Sure, you have to seek it out, probably to a greater extent than at small schools, but if you're not willing to do that you're probably not going to make it as an academic anyway.

For the OP, it seems to me that Chicago would be a bad idea unless you're extremely debt averse, but I'd take it over columbia if you are. Otherwise, there's a small group of people for whom it makes sense to take harvard over yale, but it looks like you've already ruled that out, so you should go with yale.

Im not an HLS student yet but I have already had conversations with multiple HLS profs offering me as much time as I wanted.

[oxford_don]

Yah, I completely agree--the weight of the Harvard name is probably balanced by the superiority of having a small class size/close connections with (very strong) faculty/easier mentoring opportunities.

Good luck with your decision.

I have no experience of Chicago, so I'll take your word for it. But, speaking as a current hls student, I'm not sure how it could be significantly better than harvard for faculty contact / mentoring for the people who want it. Sure, you have to seek it out, probably to a greater extent than at small schools, but if you're not willing to do that you're probably not going to make it as an academic anyway.

For the OP, it seems to me that Chicago would be a bad idea unless you're extremely debt averse, but I'd take it over columbia if you are. Otherwise, there's a small group of people for whom it makes sense to take harvard over yale, but it looks like you've already ruled that out, so you should go with yale.

Im not an HLS student yet but I have already had conversations with multiple HLS profs offering me as much time as I wanted.

Maybe this is all hearsay/anecdotal evidence. But it isn't that Harvard professors aren't accessible, it's that a) only a portion of the faculty are accessible and b) generally it is up to the student to initiate contact.

My impression from Chicago from faculty and students is that almost all the professors are a) always in the building (their offices are in the library next to where you are studying) b) interested in being good teachers and not just good academics and c) interested in talking with students.

Harvard seems to have a spectrum of faculty that runs from terrible teachers with no interest in students (ie. the class I sat in on at the ASW) to all star professors who are inaccessible because they are too busy being public intellectuals (ie. Noah Feldman being hounded by admitted students at the faculty lunch at ASW).

Not offering this as the definitive statement of the type of faculty-student interaction at Harvard. Only my impressions.

[rundoxierun]

Maybe this is all hearsay/anecdotal evidence. But it isn't that Harvard professors aren't accessible, it's that a) only a portion of the faculty is accessible and b) generally it is up to the student to initiate contact. My impression from Chicago from faculty and students is that almost all the professors are a) always in the building (their offices are in the library next to where you are studying) b) interested in being good teachers and not just good academics and c) interested in talking with students. Harvard seems to have a spectrum of faculty that runs from terrible teachers with no interest in students (ie. the class I sat in on at the ASW) to all star professors who are inaccessible because they are too busy being public intellectuals (ie. Noah Feldman being hounded by admitted students at the faculty lunch at ASW).

Not offering this as the definitive statement of the type of faculty-student interaction at Harvard. Only my impressions.

Yeah I get what you are saying. Im the type of person who would rather not be bothered unless I initiate contact so the idea of a prof reaching out to me is something I dont really even consider. I sat in on two excellent profs during ASW (Zittrain and someone else I cant remember). Plus, quality of professors is probably the factor I find least important among the schools from which I am choosing.

Like a few others have said, 220k debt is nothing to take lightly and if you know you like Chicago I dont think anyone actually in the legal field would advise you to turn it down. From what I have been told by people actually in the legal field (both practice and academia) the TLS notion that Yale is this automatic guaranteed job forever and worth any amount of money is absolutely ridiculous.

[jmkelly]

Maybe this is all hearsay/anecdotal evidence. But it isn't that Harvard professors aren't accessible, it's that a) only a portion of the faculty are accessible and b) generally it is up to the student to initiate contact.

My impression from Chicago from faculty and students is that almost all the professors are a) always in the building (their offices are in the library next to where you are studying) b) interested in being good teachers and not just good academics and c) interested in talking with students.

Harvard seems to have a spectrum of faculty that runs from terrible teachers with no interest in students (ie. the class I sat in on at the ASW) to all star professors who are inaccessible because they are too busy being public intellectuals (ie. Noah Feldman being hounded by admitted students at the faculty lunch at ASW).

Not offering this as the definitive statement of the type of faculty-student interaction at Harvard. Only my impressions.

Ok. I think your impressions are wrong, and also kind of beside the point, but I don't want to hijack your thread. But out of curiosity, whose class did you sit in on at the asw?

[twistedwrister]

Going back to the Yale v. Chicago debate, I certainly appreciate the self-selection issue, but think about it like this. The sheer number of YLS students entering academia shows that you don't have to be top of the class at YLS to have a shot at academia. That's a nice safety blanket. As for Chicago, you'd have to take Leiter's word for it. Maybe good, but not great, students at Chicago have a chance at academia, but maybe not. It's a gamble.

Looking at it another way, clerkships are a huge boost for those who want to be law profs. In comparison to Chicago, YLS places a much higher % of students into clerkships (30% v 9%, according to the most recent U.S. News data, http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandr ... s-rankings). More clerks means more people who have a legit shot at academia, which means more YLS students enter the meat market, which means more YLS students end up as profs. Given Chicago's reputation as a "clerkship powerhouse," I don't think you can explain away the clerkship disparity though self-selection. If I recall, there's a U. Chicago poster who mentioned that some Chicago Law Review board members struck out during the clerkship hunt this year (no D. Ct. or CoA offers).

Again, I think Chicago is a tremendous school. For the $$$, I'd probably go there over Yale.

[drylo]

Maybe this is all hearsay/anecdotal evidence. But it isn't that Harvard professors aren't accessible, it's that a) only a portion of the faculty are accessible and b) generally it is up to the student to initiate contact.

My impression from Chicago from faculty and students is that almost all the professors are a) always in the building (their offices are in the library next to where you are studying) b) interested in being good teachers and not just good academics and c) interested in talking with students.

Harvard seems to have a spectrum of faculty that runs from terrible teachers with no interest in students (ie. the class I sat in on at the ASW) to all star professors who are inaccessible because they are too busy being public intellectuals (ie. Noah Feldman being hounded by admitted students at the faculty lunch at ASW).

Not offering this as the definitive statement of the type of faculty-student interaction at Harvard. Only my impressions.

Ok. I think your impressions are wrong, and also kind of beside the point, but I don't want to hijack your thread. But out of curiosity, whose class did you sit in on at the asw?

OP's impressions may be wrong in your experience, but FWIW I got the same feeling when I was considering Harvard a couple cycles ago.

Going back to the Yale v. Chicago debate, I certainly appreciate the self-selection issue, but think about it like this. The sheer number of YLS students entering academia shows that you don't have to be top of the class at YLS to have a shot at academia. That's a nice safety blanket. As for Chicago, you'd have to take Leiter's word for it. Maybe good, but not great, students at Chicago have a chance at academia, but maybe not. It's a gamble.

You're still not actually addressing the self-selection issue adequately. If you demonstrated that the three from Chicago who went into academia were all ranked in the top 5 in their class, then you would still be asking us to draw an inference, but at least there would be more of a reason to draw that inference.

Also, there are just way too many variables. What if 10 of those Yalies who went straight into academia had PhDs before law school? Of course, the Chicago students could have PhDs too, but Yale just seems to draw that kind of person more.

[oxford_don]

Well, financial aid offer came back from Yale. They are offering me a Yale Law Scholarship of $17k a year. Holy sh*&. I was not expecting that.

It is now financially feasible/reasonable for me to turn down the Rubenstein ($45k a year) to go to Yale. I would graduate with a total debt load of somewhere around $160 or $170k depending on how much I save from my 2L summer. This is a far cry from what I expected from Yale ($0) and the debt load I thought I was getting myself into (over $200k). I need to verify that my scholarship will not substantially decrease for 2L or 3L year. I am specifically worried about what my 2L summer income will do to this.

So it's a horse race between Chicago and Yale. I am going to both ASWs and have until April 22nd to decide. My thinking, at this moment, is that I go to the school that I fall in love with during ASW. Might be putting too much pressure on ASW, but I think that the money vs ranking argument is pretty even given the scholarships at both schools and that I should go where I want to go.

[Emma.]

My thinking, at this moment, is that I go to the school that I fall in love with during ASW.

Do this.

Congrats man, amazing amazing options.

I <3 UChi but TBH I probably would have taken Yale had I been in your shoes.

[sarahlawg]

Well, financial aid offer came back from Yale. They are offering me a Yale Law Scholarship of $17k a year. Holy sh*&. I was not expecting that.

It is now financially feasible/reasonable for me to turn down the Rubenstein ($45k a year) to go to Yale. I would graduate with a total debt load of somewhere around $160 or $170k depending on how much I save from my 2L summer. This is a far cry from what I expected from Yale ($0) and the debt load I thought I was getting myself into (over $200k). I need to verify that my scholarship will not substantially decrease for 2L or 3L year. I am specifically worried about what my 2L summer income will do to this.

So it's a horse race between Chicago and Yale. I am going to both ASWs and have until April 22nd to decide. My thinking, at this moment, is that I go to the school that I fall in love with during ASW. Might be putting too much pressure on ASW, but I think that the money vs ranking argument is pretty even given the scholarships at both schools and that I should go where I want to go.

congrats. what an awesome cycle. The ruby is amazing, but I don't know how anyone could turn down the offer at Yale. See you at Chi's ASW

[justhoping]

the title of this thread makes me drool...

[intheend]

I can't believe nobody has quoted Dean Rangappa yet! From her blog:

No titles of nobility here: all students get to know faculty very well, starting in their first term; all students write (at least) two piece of substantial legal scholarship with one-on-one faculty guidance; and all students have access to workshops and conferences at the School. In particular, all students are free to attend the Law Teaching Series, a year-long series of faculty-led sessions which guide students through each step of the process into legal academia, from preparing a research agenda to what a "job talk" is -- these alternate with workshops where students present their own papers to faculty and peers. The advantage, by the way, of having these opportunities open to all students is that aspiring academics get to engage in a dialogue with a large swath of their colleagues, rather than the same few people over and over again...yielding more refined ideas and better scholarship.

[Borhas]

Well, financial aid offer came back from Yale. They are offering me a Yale Law Scholarship of $17k a year. Holy sh*&. I was not expecting that.

It is now financially feasible/reasonable for me to turn down the Rubenstein ($45k a year) to go to Yale. I would graduate with a total debt load of somewhere around $160 or $170k depending on how much I save from my 2L summer. This is a far cry from what I expected from Yale ($0) and the debt load I thought I was getting myself into (over $200k). I need to verify that my scholarship will not substantially decrease for 2L or 3L year. I am specifically worried about what my 2L summer income will do to this.

So it's a horse race between Chicago and Yale. I am going to both ASWs and have until April 22nd to decide. My thinking, at this moment, is that I go to the school that I fall in love with during ASW. Might be putting too much pressure on ASW, but I think that the money vs ranking argument is pretty even given the scholarships at both schools and that I should go where I want to go.

pretty sure you can't go wrong

just go to Yale, Yale debt is not even real debt anyway

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

So it's a horse race between Chicago and Yale. I am going to both ASWs and have until April 22nd to decide.

Isn't April 15 the deadline to accept the Rubenstein?

[Fresh]

It is now financially feasible/reasonable for me to turn down the Rubenstein ($45k a year) to go to Yale.

Same thing happened to me w/ HLS, even accounting for potential grant reduction following summer firm work. I have heard that Yale's max grant covers up to full-tuition. Has anyone else heard that? Or more generally, is Yale more generous than Harvard? Big $ at Y will make a final decision a lot easier for me

Isn't April 15 the deadline to accept the Rubenstein?

It is, but I'm sure they would (or did) give a few extra days

[rundoxierun]

It is now financially feasible/reasonable for me to turn down the Rubenstein ($45k a year) to go to Yale.

Same thing happened to me w/ HLS, even accounting for potential grant reduction following summer firm work. I have heard that Yale's max grant covers up to full-tuition. Has anyone else heard that? Or more generally, is Yale more generous than Harvard? Big $ at Y will make a final decision a lot easier for me

In 2010-11, students will be expected to meet the first $37,500, $38,500 or
$39,500 of their need with loans, depending on their class year. Students whose total need is less
than this amount will normally receive only loan assistance. Students whose need exceeds this
amount will often receive grants. Further need which exceeds the basic budget is usually
met in the form of additional loans.

Common myth that I heard early in the cycle too. The fact that, at the max level, the COA at all of HYS is about the same is the main reason I saw no need to apply to all 3. I have no idea where this myth came from.

ETA: For comparison, the 2010-11 Base loan at H was ~$39K