Berkeley (sticker) vs. UT (full ride) vs. NU (full ride) Forum

[alexonfyre]

100k debt for Berkeley sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Compared to zero at NU?

well closer to 40ish, but the point remains.

EDIT: Actually, people have suggested that OP leverage schollys to negotiate with Berk, but why not use those schollys to negotiate with dad? ("If I take one of the full rides, will you pay for all of my living?") It makes economic sense for him, as that would save him 30 grand vs. attending Berk at sticker. The true road to zero debt

[09042014]

100k debt for Berkeley sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Compared to zero at NU?

well closer to 40ish, but the point remains.

Again, does anyone think that her dad is going to pay less because she took a less expensive option? Really?

[alexonfyre]

100k debt for Berkeley sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Compared to zero at NU?

well closer to 40ish, but the point remains.

Again, does anyone think that her dad is going to pay less because she took a less expensive option? Really?

Check the edit home skillet

[rayiner]

I'm curious: what is OP's rationally articulated reason for wanting Berkeley so much?

[IzziesGal]

100k debt for Berkeley sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Compared to zero at NU?

Yes. If OP didn't know what she wanted to do, then I would say no. But I think going to a school that has a world renowned curriculum for the type of law she wants to practice vs. going to a school that (I don't think?) has a fully complete enviro program is worth the difference.

[juliachild-ish]

I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but...my dad and I struck a firm bargain that I will pay at least half of my law school costs. It's not really up for negotiation, because it's pretty much the only way I feel comfortable accepting money from him. Actually, if it were up to me, I wouldn't even take that much, and I may pick UT/NU over Berkeley partly in order to save him money (as well as, obviously, saving me money).

I'm not sure it makes a big difference in the decision either way. The issues at hand are still debt vs. no/little debt, city I want to live in vs. city I don't, and varying strengths of environmental programs.

Rayiner: I wouldn't say I want Berkeley so much! If I were set on it, I wouldn't have posted this thread. However, I have read convincing reasons why it has the best program for environmental law, my field of interest (IzziesGal is at Boalt now and makes good arguments for why its enviro program is superior). I prefer its smaller class size over UT's larger one. I've been told it's less competitive than both UT and Northwestern, and I think its non-letter grading system helps that. It seems to focus the most on PI of the three schools I'm considering, which in my book is a good thing.

[aesis]

Based on the OP's sentiments in the first post, it seems like UT v. Berk. Given the half scholly from her father, the choice is easy -- Berkeley. If you're going to take advantage of LRAP, Berkeley again.

That said, I'm probably going to Berkeley this fall and would choose half scholarship at Berkeley over HLS because I know I will be much happier in California (weather/practice region/IP/QOL). Contrary to TLS wisdom, it's not foolish to turn down Harvard for a MVBP w/ $$ *edit: if you know you wouldn't be happy there. Negotiate your HLS acceptance for extra cash, you haven't even received your financial aid offer yet!

I know a Boalt alumnus who leveraged his Yale acceptance for full-ride in 2003. I doubt it'd turn out that way for you because Boalt allocates more for need-based aid, but either way, $$ from Dad makes this easy from my perspective.

[rayiner]

I have work to do, but I'll mention two things.

1) Don't be short-sighted. You might think coming into law school that you want to do X, but you might figure out you really want to do Y. I went into law school thinking I'd be happy with any sort of patent job in Atlanta. While that is certainly still the case, I think I'll be happier at the place I'll end up at.

2) Don't underestimate the magnitude of the differences we're talking about here. The upper echelons of legal jobs are presumptively for HYS grads. Others can get them, but they have to overcome the presumption. There are jobs available to top 10-15% at Harvard that are only available to the top 5-10 people at the rest of the T14. I'm not talking about V10 jobs in NYC --- those are easy to get in comparison. I'm talking about places like NRDC, or joining a small litigation boutique after doing a COA clerkship, or getting involved in a niche practice like election law. These things require stellar grades at any school, but outside HYS they require the kind of impeccable grades that involve a substantial amount of luck in addition to talent and hard work.

Again, you might not have that level of ambition, but don't assume you won't develop it in law school.

[FlightoftheEarls]

100k debt for Berkeley sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Compared to zero at NU?

Yes. If OP didn't know what she wanted to do, then I would say no. But I think going to a school that has a world renowned curriculum for the type of law she wants to practice vs. going to a school that (I don't think?) has a fully complete enviro program is worth the difference.

I don't think I could bring myself to advocate for Michigan sticker over HLS or NU (full ride), even for Detroit-inner-city-community-building-law. I mean, I sometimes feel weird making suggestions about why students with Darrow full rides should choose Michigan over Harvard, and that's nowhere even close to this situation. I really don't know if I could troll that hard for my school with a straight face and good conscience (and believe me, I absolutely love Michigan and couldn't be happier about the school/career prospects), so your past few posts have taken me somewhat by surprise.

In any event, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that energy/environmental policy is the international law of the upcoming decade, and I think law schools know this when they tout their programs. If the NRDC website shows anything, HLS seems to be far more competitive for the top energy jobs, despite Boalt's world renowned curriculum (Yale: 1; Harvard: 5; Stanford: 2; CLS: 2; NYU: 2; Boalt: 0). If Berkeley were half tuition and you absolutely despised Harvard/NU, I'd still think you were a little nuts, but I'd understand that personal happiness really can be a significant factor. I truly believe in the importance of fit, but OP's obsession with Boalt at sticker over nearly every other (better) option is bordering on . . . yeah, I don't know, just odd. Is there more to this story that you're not telling us? All I can discern is that (1) you have always had some unexplained hatred for Harvard, and (2) you really don't want to stay with your boyfriend so you're trying to find an excuse to leave Chicago behind.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Also, that post really isn't a slight to Izzie - I get that OP said she doesn't want Harvard, so that takes the school out of the running. But I just cannot see how being located in SF makes Boalt worth 150k in tuition (regardless of who is paying) over a peer school, even if you're interested in energy. I certainly would be amazed if somebody took Boalt at sticker over Michigan or Virginia with 90k in scholarship money and an energy interest, so I'm trying to figure out what it is about NU with 150k that makes it so easy to brush aside as an option.

[cornellbeez]

Can I just come out and say it? Odds are, you will not land an environmental law job straight out of law school, unless you have a science background and work for a biglaw firm focusing on energy law (I know people doing this in DC, which is where a lot of the energy work is located). Go to Harvard or NU. Harvard offers much better job prospects, while NU offers comparable job prospects for free. Also, I've known a few people from various T-14s who have gone from wanting PI/gov to wanting biglaw after 1L year. If you end up wanting biglaw, Harvard and NU will offer more opportunities.

[Shaggier1]

As a 0L you have no idea what sorts of things will interest you in school. Maybe you'll love litigation and decide you want to do a federal clerkship?

This should be laminated and inserted in every prospective students' front pocket.

In the first 10 weeks of law school, every single career plan I had was turned completely upside down. Knowing this, if I was in OP's shoes, I would sprint all the way to Cambridge.

But OP has made her preferences clear and so I emphasize my earlier point: OP you really, really need to try to get money out of Berkeley. Given your H acceptance, NU $, and TX $, I would be surprised if they didn't budge.

[Shaggier1]

Can I just come out and say it? Odds are, you will not land an environmental law job straight out of law school, unless you have a science background and work for a biglaw firm focusing on energy law (I know people doing this in DC, which is where a lot of the energy work is located).

Nothing about this is accurate.

[cornellbeez]

Can I just come out and say it? Odds are, you will not land an environmental law job straight out of law school, unless you have a science background and work for a biglaw firm focusing on energy law (I know people doing this in DC, which is where a lot of the energy work is located).

Nothing about this is accurate.

Besides working in energy law at a firm, what vast environmental law opportunities are available to a law grad with no post-grad legal experience? Are environmental agencies and the like heavily recruiting 3Ls? And please don't tell me an unpaid 1L or 2L internship with an agency during the summer demonstrates a good shot at post-graduate employment.

[FlightoftheEarls]

Can I just come out and say it? Odds are, you will not land an environmental law job straight out of law school, unless you have a science background and work for a biglaw firm focusing on energy law (I know people doing this in DC, which is where a lot of the energy work is located).

Nothing about this is accurate.

Besides working in energy law at a firm, what vast environmental law opportunities are available to a law grad with no post-grad legal experience? Are environmental agencies and the like heavily recruiting 3Ls? And please don't tell me an unpaid 1L or 2L internship with an agency during the summer demonstrates a good shot at post-graduate employment.

I would imagine that this is at least somewhat accurate when considering full-time employment and not just a summer internship, at least for most students. Unless you land a federal job with the Department of Energy and/or Interior or with an established NGO (which is typically extremely competitive, see, e.g., NRDC), I would guess most people get into energy/cleantech through a firm: either doing VC fund formation for a cleantech round or working in a renewable-heavy project finance practice, and thereafter going in-house for one of these green energy companies. Of course, some local government agencies will probably have fiercely competitive environmental/energy positions, but these are quite unlikely to be of the "renewable energy/cleantech/saving-the-environment" variety that I think most people dreaming of environmental/energy law get excited about. I'm sure there are other ways into the field, but most people I know interested in energy are doing one of the former.

As a 0L you have no idea what sorts of things will interest you in school. Maybe you'll love litigation and decide you want to do a federal clerkship?

This should be laminated and inserted in every prospective students' front pocket.

I could not agree with you more. I came in convinced I wanted litigation in San Francisco, and now I'm set on M&A/PE/project finance in NYC. I know tons of people who have done the same.

[r6_philly]

As a 0L you have no idea what sorts of things will interest you in school. Maybe you'll love litigation and decide you want to do a federal clerkship?

This should be laminated and inserted in every prospective students' front pocket.

I could not agree with you more. I came in convinced I wanted litigation in San Francisco, and now I'm set on M&A/PE/project finance in NYC. I know tons of people who have done the same.

This doesn't mean no one sticks to what they decided to enter school for. Most don't, but some do.

[juliachild-ish]

I agree that there's a good chance that I will completely change my mind about what I'm interested in. However, there's also a good chance that I won't, and I worry that I will be frustrated by Northwestern's complete lack of an environmental program. I chose to attend the most prestigious undergrad school I was accepted to, even though they didn't have the major I was interested in, because I figured I would probably change my mind anyway. I always regretted that decision, since I remained interested in that particular field and was unable to explore it. I worry about making the same mistake twice.

I'm fairly confident I won't change my mind about BigLaw, as I've been working for a very large law firm for the last year. I think I've had enough exposure to definitively say it's not for me, but I suppose it's not outside the realm of possibility that something could happen to change my mind.

My mother found a great position in environmental policy right after law school. That was thirty years ago, of course--although it was also during a recession. She didn't take any specialized courses in that area, though, which I guess argues I should go to Northwestern. Have I mentioned that it's almost April and the temperatures here are still in the thirties?

[aliarrow]

You are aware no one forces you to become a corporate peon if you go to Harvard right? This is just one of the most absurd threads I've seen on TLS in a while.

[r6_philly]

You are aware no one forces you to become a corporate peon if you go to Harvard right? This is just one of the most absurd threads I've seen on TLS in a while.

You are aware the first post said Harvard needs not to be discussed right? Absurd indeed.

[aliarrow]

You are aware no one forces you to become a corporate peon if you go to Harvard right? This is just one of the most absurd threads I've seen on TLS in a while.

You are aware the first post said Harvard needs not to be discussed right? Absurd indeed.

Most "where should I go" threads involve disclaimer of "Retake need not be suggested" but most TLSers disregard those warnings anyway. If something seems misguided then it should be noted. I do think it's commendable and in good intention that OP withdrew from Harvard, but it just seems like the type of thing you will regret at some point down the road.

[r6_philly]

Most "where should I go" threads involve disclaimer of "Retake need not be suggested" but most TLSers disregard those warnings anyway. If something seems misguided then it should be noted. I do think it's commendable and in good intention that OP withdrew from Harvard, but it just seems like the type of thing you will regret at some point down the road.

You do realize that it isn't so rare that people turn down Harvard, and they don't all go to HYSCCN right?

As much as I want to go to Harvard, I don't really think it is prudent to tell someone not wanting to go to Harvard is "wrong." Personal preference/circumstances dictate personal decisions.

You are right it's pretty much the same as telling everyone to retake and shoot for HYS, which I think it's pretty silly.

Hey some people wants to give up all worldly possessions and go with refugees for the rest of their lives - let people do what makes them happy. You can't determine what's mis"guided" if you don't know what direction the person want's to go.

And if you go as far as saying "your direction is wrong" then that's pretty absurd

[FlightoftheEarls]

As a 0L you have no idea what sorts of things will interest you in school. Maybe you'll love litigation and decide you want to do a federal clerkship?

This should be laminated and inserted in every prospective students' front pocket.

I could not agree with you more. I came in convinced I wanted litigation in San Francisco, and now I'm set on M&A/PE/project finance in NYC. I know tons of people who have done the same.

This doesn't mean no one sticks to what they decided to enter school for. Most don't, but some do.

I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. The point is that the preconceived view prospective students have of certain fields and courses (I mean, Admin alone dissuades government-bound students in droves, for example) will reflect their initial intuition for some students, and will completely change for others.

[r6_philly]

I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. The point is that the preconceived view prospective students have of certain fields and courses (I mean, Admin alone dissuades government-bound students in droves, for example) will reflect their initial intuition for some students, and will completely change for others.

That's a personal process of maturing professionally and discovering what you want to do. No amount of discouragement or advice prior to law school will change that. It's as futile as telling your HS teen kids to pick the right major in college. Let them figure it out, otherwise you are actually robbing them of their maturation process.

ETA: I am saying it isn't a rule that it will change, or vice versa. So we really shouldn't dictate advice/guidance based on that because it is uncertainly either way.

[aliarrow]

Most "where should I go" threads involve disclaimer of "Retake need not be suggested" but most TLSers disregard those warnings anyway. If something seems misguided then it should be noted. I do think it's commendable and in good intention that OP withdrew from Harvard, but it just seems like the type of thing you will regret at some point down the road.

You do realize that it isn't so rare that people turn down Harvard, and they don't all go to HYSCCN right?

As much as I want to go to Harvard, I don't really think it is prudent to tell someone not wanting to go to Harvard is "wrong." Personal preference/circumstances dictate personal decisions.

You are right it's pretty much the same as telling everyone to retake and shoot for HYS, which I think it's pretty silly.

Hey some people wants to give up all worldly possessions and go with refugees for the rest of their lives - let people do what makes them happy. You can't determine what's mis"guided" if you don't know what direction the person want's to go.

And if you go as far as saying "your direction is wrong" then that's pretty absurd

I don't think the direction is wrong at all. I could be completely off base, but to me Harvard equates to nearly complete career freedom (as with Y and S). Most who go to Harvard choose to go into Corporate/Biglaw/Academia, but in whichever field OP shoots for they'll be able to step closer to the front of the line with a Harvard law degree. I'm sure the difference isn't that great with something like Berkeley for OP's goals, but I still think Harvard would provide a slightly better edge.

[czelede]

It honestly sounds like you really want to go to Berkeley. I am kind of skeptical that someone who gets free rides to UT and NU wouldn't be able to negotiate any kind of financial aid from B. While I doubt they'll match those offers, I'm sure if you were to discuss your dilemma with their office they would be amenable to giving you at least a partial scholarship, which would help justify the decision quite a bit more. Of course, visiting UT should also help you weigh that option.