Yale vs. Harvard vs. Ruby; Family Considerations Forum

[WinterComing]

I almost would let the wife decide here... All three options are great, and while I'd lean Ruby in your shoes I think going wherever she has the best opportunity makes a lot of sense. The differences between HYC end up being (relatively) marginal and very dependent on how you do there. But the differences for your wife's career sound a lot bigger.

Of course, the x-factor is that you don't really know which would be best for her at this point, which makes things difficult. Is there any chance she would know about the Boston job before the end of the month?

Feel free to disregard all this and come chill with me at Yale though But seriously, your family sounds amazing and congrats on everything!

I think she's actually likely to find out about this particular Boston job either this week or next. Once we know one way or the other, I can certainly report back.

[jetsfan1]

I almost would let the wife decide here... All three options are great, and while I'd lean Ruby in your shoes I think going wherever she has the best opportunity makes a lot of sense. The differences between HYC end up being (relatively) marginal and very dependent on how you do there. But the differences for your wife's career sound a lot bigger.

Of course, the x-factor is that you don't really know which would be best for her at this point, which makes things difficult. Is there any chance she would know about the Boston job before the end of the month?

Feel free to disregard all this and come chill with me at Yale though But seriously, your family sounds amazing and congrats on everything!

I think she's actually likely to find out about this particular Boston job either this week or next. Once we know one way or the other, I can certainly report back.

Yeah cause that's the big unknown here... if she'd be making an extra 70k a year in Boston than taking the money at Chicago almost becomes a moo point (going Joey-style there )

[Nekrowizard]

Here's the real innovator's strategy: divorce your wife on paper, go to Yale, and snag their financial aid since her income won't be dragging you down (up). Sure, you violate the sanctity of marriage and all that, but think of the savings.

[jnwa]

Here's the real innovator's strategy: divorce your wife on paper, go to Yale, and snag their financial aid since her income won't be dragging you down (up). Sure, you violate the sanctity of marriage and all that, but think of the savings.

This is the kind of outside the box thinking that gets people to the top of the class.

[tsujimoto74]

I have nothing to say that'll help you make a decision, just wanted to offer congratulations on becoming a dad and on having all of these great options available to you! I think any of the 3 choices would be very tough to turn down. Good luck.

[WinterComing]

I just got a pro-Harvard PM that I thought framed the decision is an interesting way. I'm going to paraphrase it here, because I'd like to get thoughts on it from some of the rest of you.

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that in Boston, my wife will get the startup job, and that in Chicago or New Haven, she'll keep making about what she makes now.

In that case, comparing Harvard to Chicago, my wife's roughly $200,000 increase in salary over three years would basically make up for the $215,000 Ruby scholarship. So the cost of attendance at Harvard is way more, but our income for paying that cost would be proportionally higher as well. If the net difference is more like maybe $20,000, would most people pick Harvard? (This line of reasoning calls into question my debt projections, I suppose.)

Then if you compare Harvard with the $200,000 in increased salary to Yale without it, again, would that make Harvard the most attractive option?

Thanks again for all of your thoughts, and especially for the kind words about the baby. If you want a baby photo via PM as payment for your advice, I'm more than happy to oblige.

[Pulsar]

Taxes would eat a lot of that $200k, so the difference is bigger than what you are stating. (Only the stipend part of the Ruby counts as taxable income).

[WinterComing]

Taxes would eat a lot of that $200k, so the difference is bigger than what you are stating. (Only the stipend part of the Ruby counts as taxable income).

Very good point.

[Bearlyalive]

I just got a pro-Harvard PM that I thought framed the decision is an interesting way. I'm going to paraphrase it here, because I'd like to get thoughts on it from some of the rest of you.

The above analysis puts me in team Harvard. If your wife gets the job, I think you should go for it. Keep in mind that your wife making that extra salary might also mean you don't have to take out as many loans in the first place, which eliminates many loan origination fees and drastically reduces the amount if interest you will have to pay as compared to YLS. Honestly, at this point I think all of your options are fantastic, and I'm for whichever option you think will make your wife happiest and allow you to dote on your daughter as much as possible. From what you've said, I would choose HLS in your shoes.

[ih8makingscreennames]

I was unaware of this salary increase. I don't know if startup = more hours i.e. more money spent on childcare. I agree that taxes would eat some of this, but that makes me want to change my vote to HLS.

[jbagelboy]

I just got a pro-Harvard PM that I thought framed the decision is an interesting way. I'm going to paraphrase it here, because I'd like to get thoughts on it from some of the rest of you.

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that in Boston, my wife will get the startup job, and that in Chicago or New Haven, she'll keep making about what she makes now.

In that case, comparing Harvard to Chicago, my wife's roughly $200,000 increase in salary over three years would basically make up for the $215,000 Ruby scholarship. So the cost of attendance at Harvard is way more, but our income for paying that cost would be proportionally higher as well. If the net difference is more like maybe $20,000, would most people pick Harvard? (This line of reasoning calls into question my debt projections, I suppose.)

Then if you compare Harvard with the $200,000 in increased salary to Yale without it, again, would that make Harvard the most attractive option?

Thanks again for all of your thoughts, and especially for the kind words about the baby. If you want a baby photo via PM as payment for your advice, I'm more than happy to oblige.

Yea, so if I understand your financial calculus to be that only Harvard confers this sizable income boost for your wife, then yes, HLS becomes the most attractive options for your family.

[Emma.]

Taxes would eat a lot of that $200k, so the difference is bigger than what you are stating. (Only the stipend part of the Ruby counts as taxable income).

Very good point.

And won't your wife be looking for a new job if you choose Chicago? I know this might not be quantifiable, but isn't there a good chance whatever new job she found would also come with a salary increase over what she currently earns?

[WinterComing]

Taxes would eat a lot of that $200k, so the difference is bigger than what you are stating. (Only the stipend part of the Ruby counts as taxable income).

Very good point.

And won't your wife be looking for a new job if you choose Chicago? I know this might not be quantifiable, but isn't there a good chance whatever new job she found would also come with a salary increase over what she currently earns?

This is true. But what job and salary she'll find in Chicago is really an unknown. I think the Boston job (if she gets it) is unique and would be hard to match. But yeah, she might be able to, say, split the difference in Chicago, or at least get a boost to make up for the difference in the cost of living (between super cheap St. Louis and any of these other cities).

Trying to forecast her income is riskier than just taking the scholarship, since the latter is a fixed amount that I can definitely bank on.

[trebekismyhero]

I think HLS if your wife gets the job seems to be the right answer. If not, then I think Chicago is the right answer cause your wife will easily get a job and her family is in Illinois so she will have a better social network and you will save so much money. Hard to pass up YLS, but debt sucks. You really can't go wrong with any of the the three though

[rpupkin]

There's also Chicago's rising stock. In 2006, U Chicago was #15 in rankings for undergrad and #6 in law; both of these have risen (consider the difference between #6 and #4 as it stands now!) and I think will only continue to do so.

This is really stupid. Who cares what some magazine's largely arbitrary ranking system says? If anything, Chicago has lost a little prestige over the past 20 years—back then, it had more distinguished faculty and placed more clerks on SCOTUS.

Look, Chicago is a great law school; it's been one of the top five or so law schools in the country for at least 40 years. And, as I suggested up thread, I think it's probably the right answer for OP. But the idea that its "stock is rising" is ridiculous.

[rpupkin]

Also, folks underweight outlier outcomes here. Everyone always say "assume you'll be median" - and that's true, even I do it. But you also need to take some sort of weighted average on the high-end. What if youre top quarter or top 10%. At Yale, that puts you in a position to be a feeder clerk, reasonable shot at SCOTUS, it opens up all the doors (DOJ, etc.) he's dragging his damn family across the country for. At Chicago, it gets you a nice spot working at Kirkland or Sidley. But he's saved $300K! <eye roll>

That's a little much. FIrst, let's go with your premise that there's such a thing as "top quarter" at YLS. That's 50 students, about 10 of whom will end up clerking on SCOUTS. Even at YLS, about 5% of the class ends up with a SCOTUS clerkship. It's not that different from HLS and Chi.

YLS is weird. As others have pointed out, there are no grades first semester, and no real curves after that. As a result, a lot of students have "top of the class" grades. This creates a weird dynamic, where there's pressure to impress the profs with the connections to get you those feeder clerkships. That dynamic exists at every top law school; at YLS, though, it's more exaggerated because grades alone can't distinguish you from your peers. In its own way, it creates a super competitive, gunnerish atmosphere. YLS is not all rainbows and ponies.

[jbagelboy]

Yale. Chicago for me wouldn't even be in the consideration - for what you want to do I wouldn't think twice about paying for the Yale/Harvard brand. It's a good enough school but you need better than good enough.

Do you mind expanding on this a little bit, wons? The "all the top schools are fungible" take dominates the airwaves around here and it would be nice to read a little more that draws distinctions between YHSCCN.

The conventional wisdom here is terrible, simplistic advice. There are things for which HYS offer no meaningful advantage and there are things where HYS offers an advantage that I would personally pay more than the different between full tuition and a Ruby/Hamilton for. It all depends on what you want from your career.

Also, folks underweight outlier outcomes here. Everyone always say "assume you'll be median" - and that's true, even I do it. But you also need to take some sort of weighted average on the high-end. What if youre top quarter or top 10%. At Yale, that puts you in a position to be a feeder clerk, reasonable shot at SCOTUS, it opens up all the doors (DOJ, etc.) he's dragging his damn family across the country for. At Chicago, it gets you a nice spot working at Kirkland or Sidley. But he's saved $300K! <eye roll>

For me, as someone who was gunning 100% for transactional work at a big firm, paying for anything better than CLS was masturbatory. But for my friend who, for example, is now an AUSA, Harvard was clearly the right choice because it got him a Second Circuit clerkship with middling grades, and he knew he wanted to be a prosecutor and ultimately a big firm litigator.

Yea but medianbro at chicago is working at kirkland or sidley, top 10% at chicago has a COA clerkship and his pick of the litter in any market including federal government gigs.

In areas like OPs, Yale has a more noticeable advantage over Chicago--on that we all agree, which is why I suggested YLS as well--but this characterization is over the top. To echo rpupkin, it's still not that different.

Re: your last point, maybe the clerkship market has changed a little bit since you and your friends were applying, but 2nd cir is full of high performing CLS grads, and it's become competitive enough such that it would be very tough to find a judge on that circuit taking interviews with 'middling' HLS candidates. You still have to perform well now at any school. (At least that's my experience.)

[WinterComing]

YLS is weird. As others have pointed out, there are no grades first semester, and no real curves after that. As a result, a lot of students have "top of the class" grades. This creates a weird dynamic, where there's pressure to impress the profs with the connections to get you those feeder clerkships. That dynamic exists at every top law school; at YLS, though, it's more exaggerated because grades alone can't distinguish you from your peers. In its own way, it creates a super competitive, gunnerish atmosphere. YLS is not all rainbows and ponies.

To what extent should stuff like this factor into my decision? It seems like TLS generally says to go to the cheapest law school that can get you the job you want, because it's a professional degree and you'll learn the same stuff wherever you go.

But I keep hearing that standing out at YLS requires winning a sucking-up competition, and that YLS focuses more on theory than preparing people to be lawyers. I've been told about 100 times not to go to a large law school like HLS, because I'll get lost in the crowd. I've also been told that professors at Chicago are more interested in student learning and pedagogy, as opposed to HLS professors who are more focused on writing books and such, and that I would actually learn more at Chicago.

Is any of this true, and if so, should it play a part in my decision?

[Paul Campos]

YLS is weird. As others have pointed out, there are no grades first semester, and no real curves after that. As a result, a lot of students have "top of the class" grades. This creates a weird dynamic, where there's pressure to impress the profs with the connections to get you those feeder clerkships. That dynamic exists at every top law school; at YLS, though, it's more exaggerated because grades alone can't distinguish you from your peers. In its own way, it creates a super competitive, gunnerish atmosphere. YLS is not all rainbows and ponies.

To what extent should stuff like this factor into my decision? It seems like TLS generally says to go to the cheapest law school that can get you the job you want, because it's a professional degree and you'll learn the same stuff wherever you go.

But I keep hearing that standing out at YLS requires winning a sucking-up competition, and that YLS focuses more on theory than preparing people to be lawyers. I've been told about 100 times not to go to a large law school like HLS, because I'll get lost in the crowd. I've also been told that professors at Chicago are more interested in student learning and pedagogy, as opposed to HLS professors who are more focused on writing books and such, and that I would actually learn more at Chicago.

Is any of this true, and if so, should it play a part in my decision?

All career advancement for any unicornish-type outcomes require sucking up to the right people at any law school.

All elite law schools (and most non-elite ones) focus on theory rather than legal practice.

Ask yourself who would be in a position to realistically compare the overall commitment to teaching, and general pedogogic effectiveness, of the HLS and Chicago faculties? (Spoiler: no one).

I guess the lost in the crowd thing might not be completely spurious though.

[WinterComing]

All career advancement for any unicornish-type outcomes require sucking up to the right people at any law school.

All elite law schools (and most non-elite ones) focus on theory rather than legal practice.

Ask yourself who would be in a position to realistically compare the overall commitment to teaching, and general pedogogic effectiveness, of the HLS and Chicago faculties? (Spoiler: no one).

I guess the lost in the crowd thing might not be completely spurious though.

Thanks, Prof. Campos. It's really great that you hang around these boards to set people like me straight.

As far as sucking up, the Ruby comes with a bit of faculty interaction baked in, but I'm sure it still requires just as much effort on the student's part.

And FWIW (nothing, I now see), the pedagogy comparison came from a faculty member at Chicago, who was basing it on her experience attending one of the schools I was considering and teaching at another one. But that's obviously a little bit apples and oranges, and it was a recruiting call.

Again, thanks for your comments. They were elucidating.

[Paul Campos]

I am an apostle to the Gentiles.

I think you have a pretty tough decision fwiw, and that there's no obvious answer in your scenario (so much depends on how things play out for your wife).

[gregfootball2001]

If you're going to be out of the state for one or maybe two whole summers, don't underestimate the advantage of having your wife's family nearby. Without backup, if your little one gets the flu and she can't take off of work for some reason (presentation to the CEO or something), there's a real problem.

[Budfox55]

I think if your wife gets the job, you should for sure go to Harvard. "Better" chances at your goal than Chicago, better career move for your wife, she'll make more money so the debt will be less of an issue, and also in expectation, she will probably be happier in Boston than in New Haven.

If she doesn't get the job, then its a harder decision here. Have you ever been to New Haven? As people mentioned before, New Haven for a professional is awful if you're not associated with Yale. In expectation, your wife will probably be a lot more miserable there than in Chicago. Also, assuming that she'll make the same amount of money as in her current job, you'll also have the debt burden to think of and how that's going to affect the way you raise your child(ren) going forward. If you were single I would say choose Yale, but given the considerations that you have to give to your wife/child, I think I would choose Chicago if she doesn't get the job.

[rpupkin]

All career advancement for any unicornish-type outcomes require sucking up to the right people at any law school.

All elite law schools (and most non-elite ones) focus on theory rather than legal practice.

Ask yourself who would be in a position to realistically compare the overall commitment to teaching, and general pedogogic effectiveness, of the HLS and Chicago faculties? (Spoiler: no one).

I guess the lost in the crowd thing might not be completely spurious though.

I agree with all of this. As for the theory vs. practice thing, I do think YLS has a fairly-earned reputation for being particularly heavy on theory. You'll learn less black letter law there than you will at HLS or Chicago. In spite of that, YLS grads have high bar passage rates and make fine practicing attorneys. YLS's theory-heavy focus shouldn't be a significant factor in your decision.

[Tls2016]

I would still go to Yale if I were you.
But since I'm not, why doesn't your wife start looking at jobs she could find in these places?
If you are completely consumed by the cost, which is entirely reasonable, go to Chicago for free. You will have freedom to take any job you want without worrying about loans.