Wash U $52k vs. UT $86k Forum

[Ehrler]

I saw the same question posed recently, but my circumstances are a little different. I have a pretty clear, though difficult, objective and Texas seems much more likely to help me achieve it. Texas however has both higher explicit cost and, presumably, higher costs of failure.

The goal: federal clerkship or state supreme court clerkship (where state’s electoral vote count > 9). My assessment of the programs: UT (9% fed clerks, much larger network and more regimented program with larger dedicated staff and a very well regarded law review (~#10), Wash U (3.3% Fed Clerks, smaller network, fewer dedicated staff, less well regarded law review (~#60), though they have a unique journal of jurisprudence in which I’m very interested and have already offered me a fellowship + summer research position).

Wash U COA: $52,000

UT COA: $86,000

These take into account a full tuition scholarship from Wash U (~$150,000) and a $123,000 scholarship package from UT. First question: my expected rent near Wash U is $400 and $800 near UT, are these numbers way off? I just did a little poking around on Zillow… (I don't know where the school's R&B/miscelleny numbers come from to be honest. Wash U says 22k per year and Texas says 17k, they're at the very least the opposite from what I've seen). Money is coming from savings/family.

Big Issue: St. Louis is my kind of town and closer to home (*); I do not much care for Texas. Both of these judgments are based on brief trips I took recently, and I tend to believe that long-run preferences are more malleable than short-run preferences. Second question: how much does geography matter? It sounds like I’ll just be living at the school during the semester and not liking the climate/people/scenery (aside from it being all 1974 at UT) won’t really affect me that much… Do we think that’s true?

Alternative option: Re-apply next cycle. This is least preferred at the moment because who knows if the scholarship offers will come back and enrollments are starting to tick up again making the 2018 market more competitive than the 2017 market. I took the LSAT in February and applied before getting my score or thinking too clearly about school outcomes, I just looked for general trial/appellate advocacy flavors. I would really have liked to apply to UVA, UPenn, and Notre Dame.

170 / 3.95+

[BillPackets]

Wow with those numbers you should surely reapply.

Have you looked at LSN at other applicants with those numbers?

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

You've got to reapply next year, and if I were you i'd retake in June (can only help and can't hurt--->its worth the registration fee).

[sublime]

..

[Pneumonia]

If you live with roommates near campus you might be able to get that rent number a little lower for UT, but it doesn't matter because you should reapply. You don't need to retake, but it wouldn't hurt to get into the mid 170's for you. That's a stellar GPA

[Ehrler]

Thanks for the confirmation on rent Pneumonia and Sublime.

For all saying reapply: I did apply and was waitlisted at two T14 schools. It's a nice GPA, but I'm non-URM and when I say 'No Name University,' I mean 'No. Name. University.' The LSAT and GPA Tables are strongly inverted on my ASR. 3.8-4 : 12% 3.6-3.8= 19% 3.4-3.6= 18%. 43% in 0-19 LSAT percentile, another 10% in 20-24.

I have a few respectable extracirriculars and some professional work experience, but I think my undergrad school is really limiting. Maybe different law schools see it differently though; UT and Wash U certainly didn't mind one bit. Do you really think I was waitlisted for no other reason than being a relatively late applicant?

I also think retaking would be silly, that requires an addendum saying "I'm a totally arrogant perfectionist who couldn't tolerate missing 5 more questions than I should have."

[Yea All Right]

Schools shouldn't care that much about what undergrad school you come from as long as your GPA is high since your GPA is what gets reported for their incoming class statistics. I expect you to get off at least one waitlist with money. It might be a smart decision to reapply at the very beginning of the next cycle for better outcomes.

[WaltGrace83]

Reapply. Not to say that these aren't great options, because they definitely are, but a 170/3.98 might have a serious chance at some big money at the middle T14. A 172 I think would also get you Levys, Dillards, etc.

[WokeUpInACar]

Thanks for the confirmation on rent Pneumonia and Sublime.

For all saying reapply: I did apply and was waitlisted at two T14 schools. It's a nice GPA, but I'm non-URM and when I say 'No Name University,' I mean 'No. Name. University.' The LSAT and GPA Tables are strongly inverted on my ASR. 3.8-4 : 12% 3.6-3.8= 19% 3.4-3.6= 18%. 43% in 0-19 LSAT percentile, another 10% in 20-24.

I have a few respectable extracirriculars and some professional work experience, but I think my undergrad school is really limiting. Maybe different law schools see it differently though; UT and Wash U certainly didn't mind one bit. Do you really think I was waitlisted for no other reason than being a relatively late applicant?

I also think retaking would be silly, that requires an addendum saying "I'm a totally arrogant perfectionist who couldn't tolerate missing 5 more questions than I should have."

The quality of your undergrad will be relevant to Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and maybe Columbia. At every other school its impact will be miniscule. Applying that late in the cycle is an enormous disadvantage, so I wouldn't lend any credence to your waitlists.

Your current choices are very good. Most would kill to attend schools of this quality for this little debt. However, for YOUR numbers, they are very poor options. If you applied early next cycle I'd expect near full rides from almost every lower t14 school. You absolutely must reapply. Not doing so would be insanely shortsighted. You have so much to gain by waiting, don't limit the rest of your life due to impatience.

Also schools don't give a single fuck about you being an arrogant perfectionist. That's actually pretty close to the archetypal student at most top law schools. The only thing that matters to schools outside of HYS is your highest LSAT score. Scoring lower wouldn't hurt you one bit. I'd retake the LSAT just because you have nothing to lose, and a couple more points could get you big $$ at CCN.

All of this applies even more so because you want a clerkship so badly. Going to a school like U Chicago would exponentially increase your chances.

[Ehrler]

So, I obviously rushed this thing... I feel incredibly stupid for not applying to UVA in March when I had my score...

Many an older and wiser person have said a year is nothing, even three years are nothing...

UVA is the only school I think I can get a decent offer from next year that has markedly better clerkship numbers than UT (13% > 9%) (and even with money CoA will probably be 142k, and then loans are in the picture to the tune of ~50k). Everyone else, even Chicago is hovering around 10%.

No one has commented on the 2017 vs. 2018 Market either, enrollments are back on the rise and there's no reason (economic downturn) to suspect they won't continue to rise and make life harder. It won't wipe out that 4%, but it might make it more like 2.5% and then we're splitting hairs with a $60,000 knife.

Am I going into shutdown mode?

[SFrost]

Honestly it looks like you messed this cycle. Your numbers are too good and your goals are wrong for either of your options.

Work. Save. Study. Retake. Enjoy better options next year. You've got the potential for a full ride to a CCN or T14 if you make this year all about resume building.

[Fiero85]

You really, really should sit a cycle and apply again in Sept. Re-take if you like (useful for a UVA or above full scholly, couldn't hurt!)

I think Northwestern, UVA, UChi and Penn make the most sense for your geography preferences and goals.

Be patient and watch the awesome offers roll in next year.

Good luck!

[WokeUpInACar]

So, I obviously rushed this thing... I feel incredibly stupid for not applying to UVA in March when I had my score...

Many an older and wiser person have said a year is nothing, even three years are nothing...

UVA is the only school I think I can get a decent offer from next year that has markedly better clerkship numbers than UT (13% > 9%) (and even with money CoA will probably be 142k, and then loans are in the picture to the tune of ~50k). Everyone else, even Chicago is hovering around 10%.

No one has commented on the 2017 vs. 2018 Market either, enrollments are back on the rise and there's no reason (economic downturn) to suspect they won't continue to rise and make life harder. It won't wipe out that 4%, but it might make it more like 2.5% and then we're splitting hairs with a $60,000 knife.

Am I going into shutdown mode?

You can't just look at straight clerkship numbers man. First, Fed CoA clerkships are very hard to get and you can't base your entire law school decision on getting one. Also the clerkship numbers at schools are not necessarily reflective of the chances of getting one. There's a lot of self selection because not everyone really wants to do one, plus the sample size from year to year is insanely small and just a few students either way can drastically change the numbers.

You need to think about employment numbers if you DON'T happen to land a clerkship, because that's a pretty likely scenario. Schools like UVA give you nearly twice the chance of landing a desirable job, and all it would take is sitting out a year. Any difference due to enrollment is going to be almost completely negligible also.

Rationalizing the instant gratification choice is pretty tempting, but there's just no good argument for choosing from these options instead of waiting til next cycle.

[BigZuck]

I think the clerkship or bust goal is kind of weird for a 0L to have but regardless, retake/reapply and aim higher. I guarantee you a school like Duke is going to give you a much better shot at a prestigious clerkship, let alone a school like Columbia or Chicago, not to mention the Holy Trinity.