Am I crazy? UChicago vs. Northwestern Forum

[Mal Reynolds]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

[jonny09x1]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

Classic TLS response. Thanks for the concern however.

[beepboopbeep]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

Classic TLS response. Thanks for the concern however.

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 11:21 am
Posts: 22

They're all correct, of course. Wait until that loan money starts feeling real. You could be going to school for free.

[Mal Reynolds]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

Classic TLS response. Thanks for the concern however.

Potentially leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table rightly falls within a classic TLS response.

[jonny09x1]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

Classic TLS response. Thanks for the concern however.

Potentially leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table rightly falls within a classic TLS response.

At risk of sounding like a d-bag, but also prefacing this with the fact that I'm very grateful/fortunate, money is not a big factor for me in this decision. I could go on about why I will not be delaying my legal education another year but that falls outside the topic of discussion here. I've seen these conversations tail off into this sort of debate before so please let's just avoid it.

[Mal Reynolds]

You shouldn't be going to law school with a 166-161 and a 3.9+. You should be retaking and getting work experience.

Classic TLS response. Thanks for the concern however.

Potentially leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table rightly falls within a classic TLS response.

At risk of sounding like a d-bag, but also prefacing this with the fact that I'm very grateful/fortunate, money is not a big factor for me in this decision. I could go on about why I will not be delaying my legal education another year but that falls outside the topic of discussion here. I've seen these conversations tail off into this sort of debate before so please let's just avoid it.

Are your parents paying for you or something? Even given that consideration would you rather have your parents pay a shitload of money they could have saved or given to you in a 401k? There are very few reasonable arguments why retaking is a bad idea and you're not saying any of them.

You're not a dbag for being lucky enough to have support, but you're a dbag for being profligate with your parent's money.

[jonny09x1]

There's no need to reduce ourselves to name calling or whatever. I don't need to defend myself because there are internal conversations my family has had that have no part in this thread. I don't need to prove myself to any of you, so again, let's move this conversation along. I understand where you all are coming from, this isn't a decision I'm making out of blindness.

[bk1]

NU student here but I'll try to be objective.

I think it's a wash unless your parents make somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 figures or close to it (since at that point the cost is kind of meaningless and saving them ~60k isn't a big deal). Since you say it's not a nonfactor I figure that they don't actually make that kind of money (in which case others are right that the credited thing to do is retake and save them money since they aren't actually made of money).

~60k is the price point where I think either choice is reasonable. Ray/IAFG are right that your primary career goal is unreasonable since there are so few jobs in that area. I don't think UChi has a substantial advantage over NU in placing in biglaw generally, but I do think it has a decent advantage at "elite" firms (MTO, KVN, Wachtell, etc) and clerkships (moreso CoA than district court). The thing is, these are mainly advantages for people who want to litigate since clerkships and "elite" firms are mostly litigation-focused. Your career goals are amorphous but they do seem to tend towards transactional work.

As for the work experience thing, I don't think having mediocre/minimal work experience is a significant disadvantage at NU's OCI (I say this as someone who has 1 year of completely forgettable work experience on my resume). People with that kind of background tended to do as well at OCI as you would expect them to do based on their grades. As for the social scene, there is a difference between the schools but since you're from the midwest I assume you already have friends in Chicago and that aspect therefore isn't as relevant.

In the end, I don't think there's a clear right or wrong answer here (though I do agree with the sentiment that if your parents aren't inordinately wealthy that retaking is worth serious consideration).

[jonny09x1]

This poll is so incredibly close. I'm currently leaning UC. The way I see it, UC is such a great opportunity that I would (in the long run) on,y feel comfortable passing up for a school that I'm absolutely in love with. I can't say that's how I feel about NU, I am just drawn by the different lifestyle/culture. I'll probably flip flop some more until my deadline tomorrow.

[jbagelboy]

This poll is so incredibly close. I'm currently leaning UC. The way I see it, UC is such a great opportunity that I would (in the long run) on,y feel comfortable passing up for a school that I'm absolutely in love with. I can't say that's how I feel about NU, I am just drawn by the different lifestyle/culture. I'll probably flip flop some more until my deadline tomorrow.

The poll hardly matters. Rich kids can make decisions based entirely on "lifestyle/culture" if they want to, none of the past two pages really impact this at all. Just go to Chicago if you love it this is your life and statistically speaking since you're coming from money you'll continue to have money in America #YOLO

[jonny09x1]

This poll is so incredibly close. I'm currently leaning UC. The way I see it, UC is such a great opportunity that I would (in the long run) on,y feel comfortable passing up for a school that I'm absolutely in love with. I can't say that's how I feel about NU, I am just drawn by the different lifestyle/culture. I'll probably flip flop some more until my deadline tomorrow.

The poll hardly matters. Rich kids can make decisions based entirely on "lifestyle/culture" if they want to, none of the past two pages really impact this at all. Just go to Chicago if you love it this is your life and statistically speaking since you're coming from money you'll continue to have money in America #YOLO

Haha yoloooooo. Poll obviously doesn't matter, I was just making a statement since I've been 50/50 the past two weeks and the poll is mirroring that.

[rayiner]

First, its not useful to fail to state up front that you're not cost sensitive. Second, its incredible to me that you're so preoccupied with this amorphous mid-career prestige that you think you'll be giving up by turning down Chicago, but completely unconcerned about the prestige you're forgoing by not retaking and going to HYS. U Chicago is a good school and offers substantially better opportunities than NU for the top of the class. But from a prestige standpoint, its HYS then everyone else. To the extent you'll ever think about prestige mid career, the gap between HYS and U of C is far bigger than the one between U of C and NU, especially outside of the legal field, which is where mid career prestige will be most relevant. Non-lawyers aren't going to be impressed by U of C. They will be by Harvard law.

[jonny09x1]

What is northwesterns policy on double deposits? Will they auto withdraw me from chicago if I submit my deposit before tomorrow's deadline? I may need the extra few days to comfortably make a decision....and I'm still waiting on a response from Chicago's scholarship reconsideration committee.

[igo2northwestern]

I'd be surprised if the opportunities at the two schools were actually so different. If OP were gunning for Wachtell/Munger, s/he should more strongly focus on HYS. It's a crapshoot out of Chicago and Columbia, and even more difficult out of NU. I'd guess that the top 1.5% (5 students) here have a good shot -- someone correct me if I'm off. As for the V10 more generally, and some other sought after firms, students here have a great shot; for some of them, as good or better than UoC.

I think the definition of "elite" in this thread is a bit off. V10 and V5 are aspirations at nearly every law school in the country, save perhaps Yale. Apart from Wachtell, firms recruit very actively here. And you're not losing out on much, if 3 or so firms aren't so active on campus.

[lecsa]

First, its not useful to fail to state up front that you're not cost sensitive. Second, its incredible to me that you're so preoccupied with this amorphous mid-career prestige that you think you'll be giving up by turning down Chicago, but completely unconcerned about the prestige you're forgoing by not retaking and going to HYS. U Chicago is a good school and offers substantially better opportunities than NU for the top of the class. But from a prestige standpoint, its HYS then everyone else. To the extent you'll ever think about prestige mid career, the gap between HYS and U of C is far bigger than the one between U of C and NU, especially outside of the legal field, which is where mid career prestige will be most relevant. Non-lawyers aren't going to be impressed by U of C. They will be by Harvard law.

lol at prestige.

HYS >>>>everyone else. Most people have no idea what U Chicago is, even in the Midwest. (Not that Northwestern has tons of lay prestige, but probably more.) And frankly, U Chicago is only highly ranked in a few graduate programs and is mediocre otherwise.

[cotiger]

Most people have no idea what U Chicago is, even in the Midwest.

And frankly, U Chicago is only highly ranked in a few graduate programs and is mediocre otherwise.

Jbagelboy will not be pleased.

While I find the concept of prestige irritatingly stupid, it's strange to me that when it's trotted out (at least the "lay" variety), people often look to Joe Sixpack's opinion (eg UPenn=Penn State). Among educated people, UChicago is quite correctly considered one of the best universities in the country.

[rayiner]

Most people have no idea what U Chicago is, even in the Midwest.

And frankly, U Chicago is only highly ranked in a few graduate programs and is mediocre otherwise.

Jbagelboy will not be pleased.

While I find the concept of prestige irritatingly stupid, it's strange to me that when it's trotted out (at least the "lay" variety), people often look to Joe Sixpack's opinion (eg UPenn=Penn State). Among educated people, UChicago is quite correctly considered one of the best universities in the country.

Talking about lay prestige is a rabbit hole. I will just say that I grew up in a very status conscious area (DC suburbs), and when I was applying to college I knew HYPS were great, and MIT and Caltech, but had never heard of NU, and only heard of Chicago from one kid who wanted to go there. Yeah, other lawyers will know Chicago is prestigous, but they'll also be educated about your resume post-Chicago. The fact that Chicago placed better into WLRK is impressive before the fact, but less so after the fact if you don't actually get into those firms.

In any case, this is not to say that lawyers, don't the line, won't recognize you for a few more points on the LSAT or GPA with Chicago on your resume. But if you're talking about being concerned about prestige mid career, like OP is doing, then I think lay prestige is the more important criterion. Hence my post that its weird to be so concerned about the prestige you're forgoing by going to NU, and not the prestige you're foregoing by not going to HYS.

[cotiger]

Most people have no idea what U Chicago is, even in the Midwest.

And frankly, U Chicago is only highly ranked in a few graduate programs and is mediocre otherwise.

Jbagelboy will not be pleased.

While I find the concept of prestige irritatingly stupid, it's strange to me that when it's trotted out (at least the "lay" variety), people often look to Joe Sixpack's opinion (eg UPenn=Penn State). Among educated people, UChicago is quite correctly considered one of the best universities in the country.

Talking about lay prestige is a rabbit hole. I will just say that I grew up in a very status conscious area (DC suburbs), and when I was applying to college I knew HYPS were great, and MIT and Caltech, but had never heard of NU, and only heard of Chicago from one kid who wanted to go there. Yeah, other lawyers will know Chicago is prestigous, but they'll also be educated about your resume post-Chicago. The fact that Chicago placed better into WLRK is impressive before the fact, but less so after the fact if you don't actually get into those

I definitely agree about the HLS distinction you mention that is relevant to this thread.

But as for the general lay prestige thing, you refer to the other oddly utilized metric: what does a know-nothing (in the nicest possible way) high schooler think? Though I disagree with that as well. At my non-Midwestern HS UChi was seen as maybe a half step below HYPS (maybe Columbia/Williams level?), just that you probably wouldn't want to go there bc the culture sucked. Regardless, once you start studying in UG/thinking about grad school you learn about UChi even if you hadn't before. I guess if someone's getting a communications degree chanting S-E-C they might not have heard of it, but I don't think those are the "lays" anyone is (or at least should be) referring to.

[jbagelboy]

Most people have no idea what U Chicago is, even in the Midwest.

And frankly, U Chicago is only highly ranked in a few graduate programs and is mediocre otherwise.

Jbagelboy will not be pleased.

While I find the concept of prestige irritatingly stupid, it's strange to me that when it's trotted out (at least the "lay" variety), people often look to Joe Sixpack's opinion (eg UPenn=Penn State). Among educated people, UChicago is quite correctly considered one of the best universities in the country.

#5 USNWR tied with Stanford, only behind HYPC, an undergraduate ranking: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandrevie ... iversities

#9 World (Times), ahead of Yale, Penn, Hopkins, McGill, ect. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/w ... ld-ranking

#9 World (QS), literally a prestige ranker, ahead of Princeton, Penn, Columbia, http://www.topuniversities.com/universi ... se+search=

lecsa, get yourself checked, fool. As cotiger said, for anyone whose opinion will ever matter, UChicago has excessive cache and will be recognized as academically and professionally prestigious - on par with any Ivy and head of some. And I'm not even a UChicago student, UG or LS. People's ignorance of great universities speaks more to their own cognitive and cultural impairment than the prestige of the institution.

[rayiner]

But as for the general lay prestige thing, you refer to the other oddly utilized metric: what does a know-nothing (in the nicest possible way) high schooler think?

My high-school sent about 1/3 of its class to Ivies, and another 1/3 to UVA/Berkeley/Michigan level publics. I think we were about as plugged into prestige rankings as you can reasonably expect. Note: I grew up in the 1990's and applied to college around 2001, and U of Chicago was ranked 10-14 most of those years (as was Northwestern). See: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... bbVQTAn6MQ. U of Chicago being a "top 5" in terms of undergraduate rankings is quite a recent thing. Most lay-people that will matter to your career will be as old as me or older.

[jonny09x1]

I think I've been mistaken in this thread..I'm not concerned with mid career prestige. Chicago affords it's graduates with great flexibility, in terms of what jobs and where. Their grads get jobs, and there is no debate about that. My initial concern was whether the real/perceived gap between there and northwestern was big enough to wash away my prior worries about the lifestyle/culture/rigorous environment at Chicago.

In terms of mid career flexibility, I can see where you all thought I cared about that too much. What I will say however is that while Chicago may not impress or matter 15-25 years down the line, it will matter if it affords a graduate a better starting point or employment outcome right out of school. In that line of thinking, the Chicago "stamp" isn't directly what matters, but it has an indirect effect. With that said, I am thinking one step at a time, which is why the decision process has been muddied up a bit.

[WheninLaw]

I'd be surprised if the opportunities at the two schools were actually so different. If OP were gunning for Wachtell/Munger, s/he should more strongly focus on HYS. It's a crapshoot out of Chicago and Columbia, and even more difficult out of NU. I'd guess that the top 1.5% (5 students) here have a good shot -- someone correct me if I'm off. As for the V10 more generally, and some other sought after firms, students here have a great shot; for some of them, as good or better than UoC.

I think the definition of "elite" in this thread is a bit off. V10 and V5 are aspirations at nearly every law school in the country, save perhaps Yale. Apart from Wachtell, firms recruit very actively here. And you're not losing out on much, if 3 or so firms aren't so active on campus.

At least for Chicago, you are off. To use your examples, Wachtell/Munger gave CBs to people in the top 15% (give or take). We've already had this discussion, so I do not understand why you keep coming back to it. Hiring at very selective firms? Big difference. Overall? Not a big difference.

Put me in the Rayiner camp - for mid-level prestige, it is HYS >>>> the rest. If you want to take Chicago over NU, do so, but for the right reasons.

[beepboopbeep]

I'd be surprised if the opportunities at the two schools were actually so different. If OP were gunning for Wachtell/Munger, s/he should more strongly focus on HYS. It's a crapshoot out of Chicago and Columbia, and even more difficult out of NU. I'd guess that the top 1.5% (5 students) here have a good shot -- someone correct me if I'm off. As for the V10 more generally, and some other sought after firms, students here have a great shot; for some of them, as good or better than UoC.

I think the definition of "elite" in this thread is a bit off. V10 and V5 are aspirations at nearly every law school in the country, save perhaps Yale. Apart from Wachtell, firms recruit very actively here. And you're not losing out on much, if 3 or so firms aren't so active on campus.

At least for Chicago, you are off. To use your examples, Wachtell/Munger gave CBs to people in the top 15% (give or take). We've already had this discussion, so I do not understand why you keep coming back to it. Hiring at very selective firms? Big difference. Overall? Not a big difference.

Put me in the Rayiner camp - for mid-level prestige, it is HYS >>>> the rest. If you want to take Chicago over NU, do so, but for the right reasons.

I took it to mean top 1.5% have a shot at those firms at NU. Still, I don't think we're all in disagreement - despite the bickering about whether UofC has a real advantage at elite firms, very few of us, even the Chicago partisans, are saying that the difference is worth $60k. Clerking/academia is another story, but the wisdom of choosing a school on those metrics is debatable at best.

[lecsa]

But as for the general lay prestige thing, you refer to the other oddly utilized metric: what does a know-nothing (in the nicest possible way) high schooler think?

My high-school sent about 1/3 of its class to Ivies, and another 1/3 to UVA/Berkeley/Michigan level publics. I think we were about as plugged into prestige rankings as you can reasonably expect. Note: I grew up in the 1990's and applied to college around 2001, and U of Chicago was ranked 10-14 most of those years (as was Northwestern). See: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... bbVQTAn6MQ. U of Chicago being a "top 5" in terms of undergraduate rankings is quite a recent thing. Most lay-people that will matter to your career will be as old as me or older.

Similar experience here.

I got into UChicago for undergrad, but when I applied so did 50% of applicants. It was a lot easier to get into Chicago than (what's now) lower ranked undergrads.

I don't really think it's a legit "top 5" or whatever and the USNews rankings for undergrad are even more questionable than its other rankings since it considers even more irrelevant factors than its law rankings do.

But yeah, I didn't follow rankings that closely for undergrad and I don't think most high school students do either. But that's not what i'm talking about for lay prestige - I'm talking about the general adult public. Not that you should care but the average person has no idea what Chicago is.

I know plenty of rich boomers who make more money than biglawyers who have no idea what the 'highly ranked undergrads' are because they went to their local school. They aren't in law and they might not be what you consider "educated" but they are more successful and wealthier than probably all of us will be.

[rayiner]

TBF, I don't think $60k more for U of C is unreasonable if you say want DC or New York, where the gap between NU and U of C is the biggest. I think Chicago at sticker is unreasonable if you have a 3.9/166 and could easily put yourself in contention for HYS.