Ucla vs. Michigan vs. Duke Forum

[Pigsoooooooiiiiee]

Hey y'all. Would be much obliged if I could hear any opinions about my situation.

Story right now is, I'm looking at equivalent schollies at all three schools, (20k/year). I've been here on the west coast (bay area) and would be very happen to return as my parents and boyfriend are here.

I'm pretty happy with any of the three, but am probably leaning more michigan and duke than ucla. The only difference between mich and duke is really the employment statistics. Looking at the raw numbers, it seems pretty obvious that duke is outplacing and outperforming michigan especially when it comes to big law. The thing is, michigan still places well in big law and I'm probably leaning towards government work, which michigan seems to be stronger in. In terms of campus and student life, they're pretty equal to me. Liked both campuses and student bodies so aside from employment stats, it's basically a wash.

Even though big law isn't my preference, I could still change my mind later on. Is the difference between the schools enough to warrant basing my decision solely on employment stats?

Would be really appreciative of any help you guys can give.

Thank you all!

[PRgradBYU]

In order to receive the best advice, please answer these questions: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=206299

[jbagelboy]

First, you have to tell us your COA at each school and your GPA/LSAT.

Second, there's no way you have an equivalent scholarship at Duke and UCLA.. if you want to go to UCLA, I'm sure they will give you at least $30-35K/year to compete. Also, Duke will most likely increase their scholarship if you tell them you are debating b/t them and Mich. Michigan will not increase their scholarship because they are idiotic.

At current rates, and based on what I can estimate for COA, I'd say Duke.

[BigZuck]

First, you have to tell us your COA at each school and your GPA/LSAT.

Second, there's no way you have an equivalent scholarship at Duke and UCLA.. if you want to go to UCLA, I'm sure they will give you at least $30-35K/year to compete. Also, Duke will most likely increase their scholarship if you tell them you are debating b/t them and Mich. Michigan will not increase their scholarship because they are idiotic.

At current rates, and based on what I can estimate for COA, I'd say Duke.

+1

And don't kid yourself OP, you'll be participating in OCI along with everyone else.

[Big Dog]

with the numbers to get into Michigan, UCLA should offer a whole lot more than $20k. Ask Dean Schwartz for a reval.

[Pigsoooooooiiiiee]

Thanks for the informative comments ts! Sorry for not posting this info sooner.

So, firstly ucla didn't up their offer b/c I didn't really press them on it. I suppose I shouldn't even be considering it b/c I want to leave cali. COA for both duke and Michigan will be 100k for 3 years since my parents will be paying for room and board.

I have a 170 3.6. They LSAT twice and canceled the first one. Went to a pretty huge public ug and loved it.

Also, I'm from the bay area and would like to return to there or socal if possible. Biglaw is not my goal but I want it to be an option that open.

thanks!!

[laotze]

Second, there's no way you have an equivalent scholarship at Duke and UCLA.. if you want to go to UCLA, I'm sure they will give you at least $30-35K/year to compete..

Disagree based on experience. I was offered (significantly) better schollies from certain T14s than I was from T30s. All but one of the T30s refused to match with competitive - or in some cases even equivalent - offers. I will say in particular that a UCLA/USC/Vanderbilt refused to come close to a Penn/UVA/Michigan/Duke figure.
I chalk this up to my being a severe reverse splitter, but I'm sure there are other reasons it happens.

[jbagelboy]

Second, there's no way you have an equivalent scholarship at Duke and UCLA.. if you want to go to UCLA, I'm sure they will give you at least $30-35K/year to compete..

Disagree based on experience. I was offered (significantly) better schollies from certain T14s than I was from T30s. All but one of the T30s refused to match with competitive - or in some cases even equivalent - offers. I will say in particular that a UCLA/USC/Vanderbilt refused to come close to a Penn/UVA/Michigan/Duke figure.
I chalk this up to my being a severe reverse splitter, but I'm sure there are other reasons it happens.

Im not speaking generally about ranking and scholarship; Im saying specifically with UCLA this cycle, schwartz has been playing loose and fast with $ to combat lower T14s, and Duke has made it clear it will not lose students on the basis of money to peers like Mich. Realistically, if OP had asked (which he/she admitted they hadn't), UCLA and Duke would both have upped their offers.

The first step to any law school decision is getting the best, final offers on the table.

Since LSATs were most in demand this cycle for the T20 to prevent medians from dropping too steep, it is possible your results suffered in that range, whereas MVP could afford to offer you standard packages. I dont know, but its definitely not predictive of OPs potential

[laotze]

Second, there's no way you have an equivalent scholarship at Duke and UCLA.. if you want to go to UCLA, I'm sure they will give you at least $30-35K/year to compete..

Disagree based on experience. I was offered (significantly) better schollies from certain T14s than I was from T30s. All but one of the T30s refused to match with competitive - or in some cases even equivalent - offers. I will say in particular that a UCLA/USC/Vanderbilt refused to come close to a Penn/UVA/Michigan/Duke figure.
I chalk this up to my being a severe reverse splitter, but I'm sure there are other reasons it happens.

Im not speaking generally about ranking and scholarship; Im saying specifically with UCLA this cycle, schwartz has been playing loose and fast with $ to combat lower T14s, and Duke has made it clear it will not lose students on the basis of money to peers like Mich. Realistically, if OP had asked (which he/she admitted they hadn't), UCLA and Duke would both have upped their offers.

The first step to any law school decision is getting the best, final offers on the table.

Since LSATs were most in demand this cycle for the T20 to prevent medians from dropping too steep, it is possible your results suffered in that range, whereas MVP could afford to offer you standard packages. I dont know, but its definitely not predictive of OPs potential

That makes sense. It would also explain why BU/BC refused to make offers even equivalent to those I received from UCLA/USC/Vandy/GWU. OP sounds like he's in a better bargaining position.

[sinfiery]

Both schools feed into cali well at a glance. Someone looked at the strength of Michigan grads at large cali firms and it was very strong. If you do change your mind about biglaw (and many do), both seem to have a historic trend of sending kids to CA.

I think personal preference between duke and Michigan should decide where you go but if that is truly a wash, Duke has better employment statistics on paper and with the smaller class size, would be my pick.



Plus Michigan is cold and your from CA.



Also, though I'd imagine Govt work would have more institutional support at UMich, warning Govt work in CA will likely fall fully on your personal efforts from either of these schools.

[oblig.lawl.ref]

With decisions like this I don't think there is really a good by the numbers kind of answer. The difference in peer and peer-ish schools at the same price is pretty minimal and can really get overblown around here.

You should decide which school you think you'd like more. Any other method is really just silly, IMO.

The opportunities are really not so drastically different between these two schools except maybe how many CA firms interview for OCI and how good the alumni base is out there. From the perspective of alumni base in CA I'd imagine Michigan wins but I also don't think that will be a huge issue unless you're really serious about government. And as another poaster said--you'll do OCI like everyone else. They all do.

[laotze]

From the perspective of alumni base in CA I'd imagine Michigan wins but I also don't think that will be a huge issue unless you're really serious about government.

I'd imagine Michigan must have pretty awesome national reach to maintain its placement figures, what with not having a home market and all?

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

I'd imagine Michigan must have pretty awesome national reach to maintain its placement figures, what with not having a home market and all?

[Big Dog]

Im not speaking generally about ranking and scholarship; Im saying specifically with UCLA this cycle, schwartz has been playing loose and fast with $ to combat lower T14s, and Duke has made it clear it will not lose students on the basis of money to peers like Mich. Realistically, if OP had asked (which he/she admitted they hadn't), UCLA and Duke would both have upped their offers.

That was my experience this cycle. Went back to UCLA a couple to times, and each time the money rose. They even offered to increase it again after i withdrew. Ditto Duke.

For someone desiring SoCal, UCLA a full tuition scholly is mighty tempting over a T7-10, with small $.

[jselson]

Duke for $100k sounds great, especially for your level of uncertainty about your goals. Duke also places above their ranking when it comes to judicial clerkships, which look good for both BigLaw and BigGov.

[bananasplit19]

Is there a reason you want to leave CA for school, but come back afterwards? Seems to me that if you're set on coming back to CA, then you should at least explore gunning hard for $$$ from UCLA, just to have the option if possible. Michigan and Duke are obviously elite schools with national reach, but if your priority is location (and not necessarily BigLaw), then I don't see the harm in trying to max out UCLA's wallet before making a decision.

[megagnarley]

Great info via Kaiser in another thread:

"Ok, here are your numbers between Duke & Michigan for the exact firms in the sample used earlier. First 6 firms are CA-based, while the other 2 were random non-CA high-level firms I searched. All numbers are total representation within all CA offices of the respective firms:

Quinn Emanuel: 3 Duke, 12 Michigan, 21 NYU
Gibson Dunn: 9 Duke, 18 Michigan, 22 NYU
Paul Hastings: 3 Duke, 8 Michigan, 13 NYU
Latham: 13 Duke, 19 Michigan, 16 NYU
O Melvaney: 5 Duke, 15 Michigan, 12 NYU
MoFo: 4 Duke, 18 Michigan, 16 NYU
Orrick: 2 Duke, 6 Michigan, 12 NYU
Skadden: 0 Duke, 3 Michigan, 14 NYU
Sidley: 0 Duke, 2 Michigan, 16 NYU

Total: 39 Duke, 101 Michigan, 139 NYU

Of course, we have to account for class size. Each Michigan class is a little over 3/4 the size of an NYU class, so it actually seems totally in line that the Michigan representation in the CA offices is right around 3/4 of NYU's. Of course, other factors may skew this (i.e. perhaps a greater percentage of MI students shoot for CA but don't end up getting it), but on face value, the numbers seem to indicate that NYU and MI have pretty comparable placement out in CA."