Berkeley vs. UT (in state) Forum

[hownowbrowncow]

Hello TLS community. So I got into Berkeley, very excited, woot woot. I also got into UT, which is another one of my favs. I'm a Texas resident so I'll get in state tuition, and I also received a Dean's Scholarship for 9 grand. I want to do environmental law, preferably for a non-profit. Would my career prospects (after graduating from Berkeley) be solid enough to make it worth taking on the extra 20 grand in debt per year or would I have just as many non-profit environmental opportunities if I went to UT? Many thanks.

[Nelson]

Hello TLS community. So I got into Berkeley, very excited, woot woot. I also got into UT, which is another one of my favs. I'm a Texas resident so I'll get in state tuition, and I also received a Dean's Scholarship for 9 grand. I want to do environmental law, preferably for a non-profit. Would my career prospects (after graduating from Berkeley) be solid enough to make it worth taking on the extra 20 grand in debt per year or would I have just as many non-profit environmental opportunities if I went to UT? Many thanks.

Considering that your desired practice area is extremely difficult to break into, what do you want to do if you don't get a legal job with an environmental non-profit? (Do these jobs even exist in meaningful numbers?)

Are you OK with working at a firm or doing some other kind of PI in Texas? If so, UT. If you want to work in California, then Boalt.

[JamMasterJ]

Hello TLS community. So I got into Berkeley, very excited, woot woot. I also got into UT, which is another one of my favs. I'm a Texas resident so I'll get in state tuition, and I also received a Dean's Scholarship for 9 grand. I want to do environmental law, preferably for a non-profit. Would my career prospects (after graduating from Berkeley) be solid enough to make it worth taking on the extra 20 grand in debt per year or would I have just as many non-profit environmental opportunities if I went to UT? Many thanks.

If you don't get/can't negotiate for more aid at B, go to UT

[bk1]

Is that 9k total or 9k/year? If it's per year then UT is going to cost you around 120k. If it's total, UT is around 135k. On the other hand, Berkeley out of state (if you can't get in-state after 1 year) is 236k. Although if you can get it after 1 year (not sure if you can) then it is 228k.

Honestly, UT is the far safer option of the 2 due to cost. UT will be in the 100-150k range whereas Boalt will be 200-250k range. So the financially sound decision is easily UT. That being said, if you want to work in TX then I'd say it's a slam dunk for UT. If you want to work anywhere other than TX then Boalt is the right answer (although there is lot more risk since you will be taking on over 100k more debt by going to Boalt). Is Boalt worth 100k more than UT? Probably not, but it will give you more national prospects than UT will.

[hownowbrowncow]

I'd rather work in Texas, but it would only be in Austin (the rest of the state doesn't interest me) and I hear the law market there is tiny and hard to break into for recent grads. Since I wouldn't have many options for living in Austin, my next choice would be somewhere in Cali.

And if I had an opportunity to do environmental work, anywhere in the world really, I'd take it. And I feel like a degree at Berkeley would give me a better shot at this (although this is a very uninformed assumption on my part). I'm working on my fafsa and Berkeley financial aid stuff, so hopefully I'll get some money out of them soon and that'll make this decision easier.

[hownowbrowncow]

Is that 9k total or 9k/year?

9k/year. Yeah, it would definitely save me a good amount of money. BUT, I've been checking out Berkeley's LRAP and it looks really solid.

[gaud]

if you want to work in TX then I'd say it's a slam dunk for UT. If you want to work anywhere other than TX then Boalt is the right answer.

This. Work in Austin shouldn't be too hard from UT. Personally, I'd attend UT and save all of that money.

[IAFG]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

[20130312]

You sound like a hippie. Disregard all financial advice and enjoy Berkley.

[hownowbrowncow]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

I've been outside undergrad for a couple years and done some serious soul searching. I know there's no way I could go corporate.

[hownowbrowncow]

You sound like a hippie. Disregard all financial advice and enjoy Berkley.

This person knows me well.

[Nobody]

if you want to work in TX then I'd say it's a slam dunk for UT. If you want to work anywhere other than TX then Boalt is the right answer.

This. Work in Austin shouldn't be too hard from UT. Personally, I'd attend UT and save all of that money.

Not true. Austin is a lot like Portland: it's a city that everybody wants to live in, but it's not actually that big and so the hiring market for all industries is really bad. If you were OK working anywhere else in Texas, UT would be a good call, but if you'd only be happy in Austin, you should just start focusing on out of state now.

That being said, as a splitter who probably has no chance at UT, I'm not too sure on how well UT places outside of Texas. It might still be worth going to UT on the cheap and then shooting for out of state, but I'm not sure how realistic that is.

[gaud]

if you want to work in TX then I'd say it's a slam dunk for UT. If you want to work anywhere other than TX then Boalt is the right answer.

This. Work in Austin shouldn't be too hard from UT. Personally, I'd attend UT and save all of that money.

Not true. Austin is a lot like Portland: it's a city that everybody wants to live in, but it's not actually that big and so the hiring market for all industries is really bad. If you were OK working anywhere else in Texas, UT would be a good call, but if you'd only be happy in Austin, you should just start focusing on out of state now.
That being said, as a splitter who probably has no chance at UT, I'm not too sure on how well UT places outside of Texas. It might still be worth going to UT on the cheap and then shooting for out of state, but I'm not sure how realistic that is.

I did not know (hence, the "shouldn't be" instead of "won't be") . Seriously, thanks for the info as UT is a school I'm considering!

[IAFG]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

I've been outside undergrad for a couple years and done some serious soul searching. I know there's no way I could go corporate.

Wiser than you have been wrong before.

[20130312]

I know there's no way I could go corporate.

Good luck being picky ITE. Also, how's Texas treating ya? I imagine a bar full of rednecks saying "we don't take kindly to your types around here."

[Paul Campos]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

The other problem with giving that advice is that it assumes the OP will be able to get a job doing enviro non-profit work, or for that matter non-profit work of any kind. If top schools have LRAP programs that pays off your law school debt if you get one of those jobs, and in addition the federal government will pay it off after ten years in such a job, Econ 101 should tell people that those jobs are going to be FAR MORE COMPETITIVE than much higher-paying jobs that don't come with those fringe benefits. And that's not even taking into account the ideological component, i.e, people like the OP who claim they won't even consider for profit firm gig.

[IAFG]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

The other problem with giving that advice is that it assumes the OP will be able to get a job doing enviro non-profit work, or for that matter non-profit work of any kind. If top schools have LRAP programs that pays off your law school debt if you get one of those jobs, and in addition the federal government will pay it off after ten years in such a job, Econ 101 should tell people that those jobs are going to be FAR MORE COMPETITIVE than much higher-paying jobs that don't come with those fringe benefits. And that's not even taking into account the ideological component, i.e, people like the OP who claim they won't even consider for profit firm gig.

You are oversimplifying the matter. Schools vary in what qualifies for LRAP and not all schools require that it be strictly for a "non-Profit." which is why I said applicants should compare LRAP programs.

[hownowbrowncow]

I know there's no way I could go corporate.

Good luck being picky ITE. Also, how's Texas treating ya? I imagine a bar full of rednecks saying "we don't take kindly to your types around here."

Being picky and working hard towards what I want has served me better than settling for what I can get at the moment.

Haha, actually Texas isn't too bad. Yes, there are some rednecks who eyeball me with my pierced ears and long hair, but when I smile and treat them like human beings they aren't too shabby. Ill-informed, but good people all around (for the most part). Also, I live north of Dallas, which is a very cosmopolitan place (surprisingly). Not a whole lot to do here but shop and be a consumer, but it seems people of every breed are bonding over that past time.

[hownowbrowncow]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

The other problem with giving that advice is that it assumes the OP will be able to get a job doing enviro non-profit work, or for that matter non-profit work of any kind. If top schools have LRAP programs that pays off your law school debt if you get one of those jobs, and in addition the federal government will pay it off after ten years in such a job, Econ 101 should tell people that those jobs are going to be FAR MORE COMPETITIVE than much higher-paying jobs that don't come with those fringe benefits. And that's not even taking into account the ideological component, i.e, people like the OP who claim they won't even consider for profit firm gig.

You are oversimplifying the matter. Schools vary in what qualifies for LRAP and not all schools require that it be strictly for a "non-Profit." which is why I said applicants should compare LRAP programs.

Berkeley seems to have a very generous and overarching LRAP. Also, I should've inserted this disclaimer somewhere: enviro is my ideal position, but I wouldn't mind at all doing other forms of PI like social justice or even non-PI (which I guess would just be normal legal work) if it were something I believe in, like working for a yoga company (cue the "this dude is such a hippie" eyeball roll).

With regard to the competitiveness of non-profit jobs, I've been quizzing a 3L Boalt envirodude and a couple other Boalties about available non-profit positions and they make it sound like there's PI gold in dem San Fran hills.

[Paul Campos]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

The other problem with giving that advice is that it assumes the OP will be able to get a job doing enviro non-profit work, or for that matter non-profit work of any kind. If top schools have LRAP programs that pays off your law school debt if you get one of those jobs, and in addition the federal government will pay it off after ten years in such a job, Econ 101 should tell people that those jobs are going to be FAR MORE COMPETITIVE than much higher-paying jobs that don't come with those fringe benefits. And that's not even taking into account the ideological component, i.e, people like the OP who claim they won't even consider for profit firm gig.

You are oversimplifying the matter. Schools vary in what qualifies for LRAP and not all schools require that it be strictly for a "non-Profit." which is why I said applicants should compare LRAP programs.

Do you have any numbers? What does "not all" mean?

[Paul Campos]

If a person is truly 100% certain they only want to work in PI, they should disregard scholarships and look only at LRAP. The problem with giving that advice is, so many 0Ls predict incorrectly about what they will want to ultimately do.

The other problem with giving that advice is that it assumes the OP will be able to get a job doing enviro non-profit work, or for that matter non-profit work of any kind. If top schools have LRAP programs that pays off your law school debt if you get one of those jobs, and in addition the federal government will pay it off after ten years in such a job, Econ 101 should tell people that those jobs are going to be FAR MORE COMPETITIVE than much higher-paying jobs that don't come with those fringe benefits. And that's not even taking into account the ideological component, i.e, people like the OP who claim they won't even consider for profit firm gig.

You are oversimplifying the matter. Schools vary in what qualifies for LRAP and not all schools require that it be strictly for a "non-Profit." which is why I said applicants should compare LRAP programs.

Do you have any numbers? What does "not all" mean?

Also, since we're talking about Boalt: "To qualify for the LRAP, a graduate must work for a nonprofit organization or an agency of government in law-related employment that makes substantial use of legal skills." From UC-Berkeley LRAP site.

[bk1]

Do you have any numbers? What does "not all" mean?

Also, since we're talking about Boalt: "To qualify for the LRAP, a graduate must work for a nonprofit organization or an agency of government in law-related employment that makes substantial use of legal skills." From UC-Berkeley LRAP site.

You're right that most LRAP's require employment at a 501c3/international NGO/government, however there are some exceptions. Skimming the TLS guide to LRAP (which could be outdated), these schools allow for employment outside of 501c3/NGO/government positions:

UMich
UVa (if it is within VA)
CLS
HLS

And I haven't even looked at all of them.

[IAFG]

Hope you didn't close the tab: keep reading that UC-Berkeley LRAP site. Boalt has a trial program to broaden the scope of LRAP eligability. As for "numbers" and "not all," Econ 101 should tell people that if most schools won't let people work in the private sector under LRAP, those who can (like, IIRC UMich students) are at a competitive advantage since they can afford to take that work.

[MrAnon]

You guys should really assume NOTHING about any schools LRAP. Those programs can be wiped away in a heartbeat and schools can and do change them.

Best example: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/06/unc-law- ... e-program/

[bk1]

You guys should really assume NOTHING about any schools LRAP. Those programs can be wiped away in a heartbeat and schools can and do change them.

Best example: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/06/unc-law- ... e-program/

Of course they CAN be wiped away, but it is not a bad bet to believe that LRAP programs at top schools won't change. Many of them basically lock you into a given LRAP based on your graduation date so that even if the program changes down the line, you still get the same LRAP that you signed up for when you matriculated.

UNC isn't a good example since LRAP programs at non-top tier schools generally suck (because these schools don't have the same kind of endowments/funding that top tier schools have).