Excluding HYS, how much does it matter which T-14 you pick? Forum

[Sojourner2]

The Facts: I have been admitted to Duke, Georgetown, UVA ($), Columbia, and Chicago. Still waiting to hear from a few others (including HS) and still waiting to hear back on scholarship offers from all schools except UVA. I want to practice in a firm in DC (strong family ties there). My SO wants to go to school in Charlottesville (already admitted). I take studying very seriously. I would love to clerk before working for a firm if the opportunity were to arise.

The Conundrum: I really want to go to Columbia and Chicago because they are ranked higher and place better in big firms. However, to do so would be a difficult for me to justify given my SO really wants to go to school at UVA and the difference between CC and UVA in ranking is not enormous.

My Question: In an attempt to convince myself that I'm not closing too many doors by going to UVA, I have been researching these schools exhaustively to see how they compare. Here is what I am finding: the stats say that places like Columbia and Chicago place better than UVA. Everyone on these boards tends to advise people to go to those schools over a place like UVA because their graduates place better. But I'm also finding that for students who do really well at a slightly lower ranked T-14 school, they still seem to have a decent shot pretty much anywhere.

This has lead me to the conclusion that a lot of us (myself included) may just be confusing correlation and causation. Chicago (for example) places better in Big Law than UVA, so we tell people interested in Big Law to go there. That is, we act as though graduating from Chicago improves your prospects, when really it may be that Chicago is correlated with better prospects because, on average, slightly more intelligent/capable/hard-working students go to Chicago over UVA, and this explains the placement differences. If so, then it would suggest that if you are equally hard-working, then regardless of where you go you will have equal career prospects. (As noted in the subject line, this hypothesis excludes HYS and is limited to T-14.)

Hence my question: If you exclude HYS and you are a serious student committed to working really hard, does it make a big difference if you go to a CC over UVA, or UVA over Georgetown, etc.? If you could go to Columbia or Chicago but instead choose UVA and do just as well (or better, relative to your fellow students since the competition in theory should be a little easier), wouldn't your job prospects be about the same?

If not, why not? What piece of the puzzle am I missing?

[Tiago Splitter]

Chicago's medians are 3.9/170. UVA's medians are 3.87/169. I don't think the caliber of student going in has anything to do with the outcomes, because the caliber is effectively the same. Chicago places better because the big firms that hire the most people will go deeper into Chicago's class. But if you get good money from UVA there's nothing wrong with going there. There is a range in which you'd get a job from Chicago but won't from UVA, but that range is pretty small.

[daleearnhardt123]

How much $ at UVA?

I think the $ at UVA and the fact that your SO wants to be there is more than enough to tilt the scales in UVAs favor. Here's some other things you don't seem to have considered:

Columbia and Chicago may have more biglaw-focused students as a % of the class than do UVA. If a greater % of UVAs top students want to do PI instead of biglaw, then that's going to drive down their stats. BUT, that doesn't mean UVA doesn't open as many doors. And I think many people on this board and especially many people in UVA would echo the UVA-is-PI-centric sentiment.

Also, the real two doors that may close as you start to go to inferior schools are academia and federal clerkships. In federal clerkships it looks like chicago and columbia have no advantage, and in academia it looks like if they have an advantage it is not major.

In sum I'd say C+C have slight biglaw advantages that might get overstated by a look at raw numbers. They also have close to no advantage in clerkships, and a slight advantage in acaedemia. With that said, considering your reasons for picking UVA, i don't think C+Cs slightly better prospects justify picking them instead.

[manu6926]

...

[aboutmydaylight]

Are you married? If not, I wouldn't really add that much weight into my SOs opinion. Maybe that's just me though.

UVA is a great school. UVA with money could easily be a better choice. I think its too early to tell since you're awaiting money offers.

[burtmacklin]

It doesn't necessarily work as you described it, there will be a good portion of people at UVA that made the same exact choice as you and took the money over sticker at CCN, and plus there's gonna be the people paying sticker that are literally fighting for their livelihood, don't discount what something like that will do for a person who may have only scored like two points lower than you on the LSAT. I actually think UVA could end up being the smart choice for you, but I'm just saying don't pick it thinking it makes you a lock for a certain percentile, there will be other people just as capable with just as much or more on the line

Edit: I'm a 0L but this seems to be the sentiment I've gathered from these boards

[Candy Wrappers]

Are you married? If not, I wouldn't really add that much weight into my SOs opinion. Maybe that's just me though.

i agree with this ^

not to be a mean person but, this is your future. and the fact that you are posting about this means you, personally, is leaning towards your own priority. but you don't want to hurt anyone (and i understand that).

if you are married. then you have to evaluate how the decisions will effect you (as an individual) and the other you( as a husband/wife).

if you are not married, pick yourself. only you can decide which decision will make you happy.

[Cellar-door]

I think if you are strongly confident about doing well in law school and do not care much about prestige, then whether you pick Chicago, Columbia or Virginia won't matter. Having said that, with that mindset and actual ability, whether one goes to HS or CCN won't matter as well.

Ignore this advice.
Everyone at the top schools (probably every school really) is confident they will do well as a 0L. Unless they go to Yale half of them are wrong.

Make your decisions with the assumption you will be median. If UVA gives you money go there, if they don't you should probably consider Chicago or Columbia, if you get into H/S I would personally take either over UVA if your scholarship at UVA is less than say $125K, which is the point it would become interesting.
I haven't looked at the LRAP programs at all of these schools, but that is something to look at as well as employment numbers when making your decision.

[manu6926]

...

[Cellar-door]

I think if you are strongly confident about doing well in law school and do not care much about prestige, then whether you pick Chicago, Columbia or Virginia won't matter. Having said that, with that mindset and actual ability, whether one goes to HS or CCN won't matter as well.

Ignore this advice.
Everyone at the top schools (probably every school really) is confident they will do well as a 0L. Unless they go to Yale half of them are wrong.

Hence I said "strongly". Perhaps I should have said "sure" instead.

You are a 0L, go look in the Law students forum, there is no such thing as sure with forced curves.

[worldtraveler]

I think if you are strongly confident about doing well in law school and do not care much about prestige, then whether you pick Chicago, Columbia or Virginia won't matter. Having said that, with that mindset and actual ability, whether one goes to HS or CCN won't matter as well.

Ignore this advice.
Everyone at the top schools (probably every school really) is confident they will do well as a 0L. Unless they go to Yale half of them are wrong.

Hence I said "strongly". Perhaps I should have said "sure" instead.

That would be even dumber.

OP, there are very few differences, for the most part. But this also depends on what your individual goals are and where you want to be. Do you want academia? Clerkships? Or just big law? Have a geographical preference in mind?

[star fox]

Do not disregard your SO if your relationship has been long term

This decision comes down to scholarship offers.

[cron1834]

/relationship.

[lakers180]

ya op, strength of relationship and impact of different locations on it is what you need to think about

ccn clearly means better options so weigh that versus the above

/thread

[Candy Wrappers]

i gave up going to NYU Stern for my then serious SO. he end up giving up on our relationship. so i mean. its up to you, OP to decide just how much LS is to you. both are risky investments. so be smart.

[Crowing]

This is really such a personal question that nobody is going to be able to give you good advice. Only you can properly evaluate how important this relationship is to you, and how hard it would be to live apart.

The only thing people can really tell you is that the difference between CCN and UVA is not going to be huge, and you wouldn't be crazy to take UVA. But whether or not you are willing to make that decision is just gonna require internal reflection.

ETA: I came to UChi with my SO but this is where we both wanted to be so neither of us gave anything up. I think I would've been willing to go to another T14 if the situation called for it, maybe even at similar price. But again, that decision is super personal. I think it's important to consider if you will feel any regret or resentment for perhaps not taking the best opportunity available on paper.

Feel free to PM me if you want to talk about anything more specific.

[thewaves]

My friend turned down CCN for Berkeley. She's in a serious relationship that turned into an engagement. Aside from HYS, they were not going to move too far away.

[jumpin munkey]

This line of thinking might make sense in the abstract but doesn't have much applicability in the OCI context. It's not like a Chicago kid sits down in an interview and displays how hard-working he is in a way that the Georgetown kid can't. It's that the Chicago kid sits down with median grades and the interviewer/firm, rightly or wrongly, thinks he is better qualified than the Georgetown kid with top third grades. So you choose Chicago.

This is the nuanced point that always needs to be repeated. It's not that the student body is of the same caliber at every T14 -- someone who gets into Penn and HLS has a better shot at Coif at Penn than magna at HLS and it would be absurd to suggest otherwise. It's just that the difference in caliber of the students doesn't come close to tracking the difference in job opportunities. You'll still be fine at Penn come the end of the day, but if you want Sullivan and Cromwell or Cravath you're going to need to seriously blow 1L out of the water in a way that you wouldn't need to at HLS, and while that's easier to do at Penn, it's not THAT much easier.

[jbagelboy]

First, UVA w/ $$ is justifiable over HSCC even without a relationship if the COA difference is non-negligible. Those schools provide marginally better opportunities, but if it would come at great cost to your personal life, long distance could impact your performance and ultimately be a worse decision. Yale is the only school where I might be like "come on..." to my SO.

Second, if you are engaged, staying together is a legitimate priority. You do have to balance your relative priorities though - if your partner is totally unwilling to move for an insignificant reason, that would be a problem, but if you could both go to UVA that would be completely understandable.

Third, as someone who moved with their SO for law school, relationships in law school are fucking difficult. Obviously your personal life is your own, but since you've put it up here as a factor, I'll just say, you will change as a person (you both will presumably) and law school will inevitably take its toll on the relationship. Lots of people make it through, but a lot of others don't. Two serious couples in the past month who started law school together have confided to me they are splitting. Sometimes I think being single (or in a very stable, non-clingy long distance) might be simpler; then again, my relationship does provide core support in times of need and its carried me through pretty well. It's not easy, but it's worth it if you want it to be.

Fourth, negotiate the shit out of everyone between now and May. Don't tell UVA or the other schools about this personal consideration - give them brass tax, no mercy, and cop dat scholly $$$.

[McAvoy]

Meh. You can't make a bad choice here with schools; do what is going to make you happy. If your SO makes you happy, dont give that up for prestige. You'll probably regret it. If money will make you more happy and fulfilled, you know what to do.

What's certain is you're going to outlive your ambition, die, and become (completely) irrelevant, so don't make a decision based on impressing others, yo.

[Nelson]

This is the nuanced point that always needs to be repeated. It's not that the student body is of the same caliber at every T14 -- someone who gets into Penn and HLS has a better shot at Coif at Penn than magna at HLS and it would be absurd to suggest otherwise. It's just that the difference in caliber of the students doesn't come close to tracking the difference in job opportunities. You'll still be fine at Penn come the end of the day, but if you want Sullivan and Cromwell or Cravath you're going to need to seriously blow 1L out of the water in a way that you wouldn't need to at HLS, and while that's easier to do at Penn, it's not THAT much easier.

There's so much wrong in this.

[Candy Wrappers]

What's certain is you're going to outlive your ambition, die, and become (completely) irrelevant, so don't make a decision based on impressing others, yo.

gonna have to write this down.

[jbagelboy]

This is the nuanced point that always needs to be repeated. It's not that the student body is of the same caliber at every T14 -- someone who gets into Penn and HLS has a better shot at Coif at Penn than magna at HLS and it would be absurd to suggest otherwise. It's just that the difference in caliber of the students doesn't come close to tracking the difference in job opportunities. You'll still be fine at Penn come the end of the day, but if you want Sullivan and Cromwell or Cravath you're going to need to seriously blow 1L out of the water in a way that you wouldn't need to at HLS, and while that's easier to do at Penn, it's not THAT much easier.

There's so much wrong in this.

I find the bolded totally unfounded. How is it absurd to suggest otherwise? If you are good at law school exams, you'll be good at them at Penn or at Harvard (with a reasonable variation for random idiosyncratic grading by a particular prof). If you just don't get it, you won't get it at either school. I don't know why people on TLS so brazenly announce this kind of garbage, not to mention treating it as axiomatic.

The part about S&C and Cravath dipping deeper into H's class, that is pretty well substantiated. The rest is just total speculation.

[jumpin munkey]

I'd honestly like to here your takes (not trolling or confrontational or anything). I didn't see it as controversial at all.

First of all, to clarify, I'm not arguing it's going to be much easier to do at Penn than at HLS -- just that it will be easier, even if it's only by a very small amount. I'm not in any way saying people should be basing any sort of decision on where to go over this.

Second, I of course agree that there are people who will "get" LS exams and there are people who won't. But I don't think the likelihood of "getting" law school exams is wholly divorced from things like the LSAT or good undergrad performance. Sure, there are a lot of smart kids at Harvard with 3.9/175s for whom a law school exam isn't a strong suit. But "getting" a law school exam really only has meaning in relation to your competition.

jbagel, I don't understand the point about how "if you're good at law school exams, you'll be good at them at Penn or Harvard." Being "good at law school exams" has very little absolute content. On the one hand, I don't think this is disagreeing with me. A kid who gets top 5% at Penn as a 1L and transfers to HLS isn't going to end up below median -- but I'm not claiming the differences are that drastic. Really the only thing I'm claiming is that of the kids who finish, say, between the 8 and 10 percent marks at Penn, a lot of those kids would finish outside the top 10% if they were at HLS, even if just by a smidgen. Not a big difference, but a difference. In more granular terms, there are a lot of kids that get the 14th A in a 1L class at Penn (when the 15th grade is an A-) who would've been pushed into an A- at HLS because the quality of the competition is a little better.

What do you/Nelson think? Honestly curious, not doing rhetoric.

[Tiago Splitter]

In more granular terms, there are a lot of kids that get the 14th A in a 1L class at Penn (when the 15th grade is an A-) who would've been pushed into an A- at HLS because the quality of the competition is a little better.

But there aren't a lot of those kids. There is one per class. And that's ignoring the fact that the last A and the first A- at Harvard will both be given an H.

Second, I of course agree that there are people who will "get" LS exams and there are people who won't. But I don't think the likelihood of "getting" law school exams is wholly divorced from things like the LSAT or good undergrad performance.

It isn't wholly divorced. LSAC has provided data to prove this. But the correlations are fairly weak, and in practical terms the LSAT and GPA medians of the two classes are nearly identical.

Many other random factors will have more of an impact on your grades than the relative student bodies.