Washburn $$$$ vs 15k/yr @ KU or OU vs sticker WUSTL Forum

[EconProfLawyer]

Pretty much have narrowed down my admission cycle to four schools at this point. I don't neccesarily care where I work, although I would like to be in a moderate sized city, and I'm not looking for biglaw. Can choose from

Washburn - They basically pay me $1500 a year to go there
Univ of Kansas - In-state but no scholarship so $15,000 a year
Univ of Oklahoma - Out of state but $10,000 a year (at least, they are rereviewing my app for more money this week) scholarship so $16,000 a year or less
WUSTL - $40k/yr

Basically I'm leaning towards OU at the moment. The economy overall is better and larger there than Kansas, and I have heard nothing but good things about the law school. Add in the fact that they place extremely well in OKC and Tulsa and they are probably my top choice especially of they come through with another 2-4k/yr in money

Washburn is tempting to be able to go for free, but I would have to live in Topeka, and I worry about employment opportunities being worse upon graduation.

KU does not seem like a good choice, paying almost 50k to have access to the same markets I could have access to at Washburn seems like a bad decision.

WUSTL is the best school I applied to, but paying 40k+ a year for tuition ITE does not seem like a good choice.

I would rank them
1)OU
2)Washburn
3)KU
4)WUSTL

as far as the combination of cost/benefit...

Thoughts?

[Lomax]

Realistically speaking, your employment opportunities won't be significantly diminished going to Washburn instead of KU. The fact that Washburn is in Topeka opens you up to some nice opportunities interning in state government, and Topeka is a much nicer city to live in than Lawrence. The current DA of Johnson County is a Washburn grad. There are many very successful businessmen who graduated from Washburn Law. I would go there rather than KU, especially since you'll be saving $49,500 by doing so. UO wouldn't enter the picture for me. Now, with both Washburn and KU, you're looking at staying in Kansas, Nebraska, or Missouri for sure. If you go to WUSTL, you're giving yourself a chance at working on the coasts, in Chicago, or in Texas (should you do well in school). The debt would be a problem, though, and doing well in school would be especially difficult at WUSTL. I would probably opt for Washburn.

[KansasSplitter]

I'd go with Washburn as well. It has basically the same ceiling as OU or KU in terms of income upon graduation, and it sounds like you'd be able to get by on a little more than $10k/year in loans. That's a steal.

WUSTL is the gambler's option. High risk, high reward. Will the economy be significantly better by OCI of your 2L year? If so, it's probably the best choice even with the debt considerations. If not, you could wind up royally eff'd with 200k in loans and the same job you could have scratched out at KU/Washburn. Tough choice, and totally one of personal preference.

[EconProfLawyer]

So you dont think the job prospects in KC/Wichita will be tougher going to Washburn than they will be going to KU for example? I guess my biggest fear with Washburn will just be finding gainful employment upon graduating.

[gbpackerbacker]

BOOOOOMER! haha I am from Norman, and I can answer whatever questions you may have...

[Lomax]

So you dont think the job prospects in KC/Wichita will be tougher going to Washburn than they will be going to KU for example? I guess my biggest fear with Washburn will just be finding gainful employment upon graduating.

Job prospects in KC/Wichita will probably be about the same having gone to either KU or Washburn. You might have a slight edge, all else being equal, having gone to KU. You will have to do well in school and have a full resume at either to have a decent shot at a high-paying job straight away. Given that your chances of securing a high-paying job actually aren't great attending either, and that KU's job placement advantage is quite small, the difference in cost should direct you towards Washburn. Going to Washburn would also mean a significant boost in quality of life.

[sooner25]

SOONER!!

go to wstl

[rjl]

... and Topeka is a much nicer city to live in than Lawrence.

OK. Let me set this up by stating I was faced with the exact same decision as OP and chose Washburn, but this quoted statement requires the worse possible crack found in the dirtiest possible gutter to be spoken with a straight face.

There is no way, on any scale, that Topeka is a nicer town to live in than Lawrence. Well, maybe one: rent is a little cheaper in Topeka, but that's just because no one wants to live there.

[erniesto]

If you have no desire to be a big firm monkey you can strike WUSTL from your list. No reason to blow that kind of money if you want local government and small firm jobs.

[Lomax]

... and Topeka is a much nicer city to live in than Lawrence.

OK. Let me set this up by stating I was faced with the exact same decision as OP and chose Washburn, but this quoted statement requires the worse possible crack found in the dirtiest possible gutter to be spoken with a straight face.

There is no way, on any scale, that Topeka is a nicer town to live in than Lawrence. Well, maybe one: rent is a little cheaper in Topeka, but that's just because no one wants to live there.

Topeka has many large parks (including a nice zoo), several interesting museums, the state capitol, the amenities one would expect of a large town, and, as you point out, a very low cost of living. It, unlike Lawrence, is not dominated by a university and its students. However, special events held in Lawrence and Manhattan (where Kansas State University is located) are easily accessible via I-70, which has recently been expanded to 6 lanes between Topeka and Lawrence.