Timing/Usefulness of Graduate Degrees and Going Abroad Forum

[namename]

This is my first post, so thank you in advance for your responses. As a long time reader of TLS, I know that more information provided up front usually produces more carefully qualified responses -- so excuse me in advance for the extra information. Finally, I may delete this post (quite a bit of information on it), so I would appreciate keeping the full quotes to a minimum.

I am strongly considering law school for a variety of reasons (interested in the law as it relates to policy/society, career flexibility, financial benefits, etc.). I graduated in 2009 with degrees in Economics, IR, and Chinese, and currently work for a good public policy nonprofit in Washington, DC. GPA = 3.8 and LSAT = 170. Ultimately, I would like to work for a federal agency, Congress, nonprofit or practice international law. I have backpacked/studied in China, and am planning on making Asia a part of my life/career. One possibility is working for the USTR on issues of international trade, or some such path.

To the point -- I am trying to figure out whether or not to get an advanced degree, and when to pursue this (i.e. before or after the J.D.) Possible options include: LSE: MPP, MSc Global Politics, MSc Philosophy and Public Policy; Nottingham: MA Contemporary Chinese Studies; LeeKY: MPP. Many foreign programs are 1 year and cost ~ $US 25,000 plus COL. What about getting a HKU JD (2 years, about the same-ish price as international MA) and then going to a school like Michigan and getting a JD? Is a thing like this even allowed? Does getting a graduate degree before law school help with admissions/financial aid/summer jobs?

I know that all of this seems like a lot of school, but I work with people who have MD MD/JD JD/MPP PhD and so it is all relative. Thank you again!

[General Tso]

normally I'd say no but since you are talking China then it's different.

is money no issue here? you might consider doing a joint degree to save on one semester's tuition. some schools allow you to do a joint degree with any university anywhere.

[namename]

Thank you for your response. Money is, of course, always something of an issue. However, an extra 30k isn't a killer relative to the cost of law school. Moreover, an advanced degree might partially pay for itself (ex. opp. costs) in the form of additional fin. aid dollars, better job prospects, and increased international contacts, not to mention the value of living in England, China, HK, Singapore, etc.

I have considered doing a dual degree, but here are my thoughts on it:

If I go to a great law school, it is uncertain that I will be in the top deciles of the class. Though I would like to think that I have a good chance, it is not a given. Why add the extra pressure and stress of a masters program on top of law school? Moreover, many international programs are only a year long, which puts the cost and length about equal to a US dual degree. Why not take the degrees sequentially and enjoy both, rather than concurrently and enjoy neither? Would it not be better to bring the knowledge and experience that a graduate degree would afford into the classroom and the interview process, rather than after?

Do you know of any schools that allow you to obtain a joint degree with any university anywhere? Thanks!

[webbylu87]

Speaking purely at the UK-based grad programs you suggested, looking at your options I'd eliminate Nottingham. It carries little to no name recognition outside of the UK and unless you plan on staying in the UK, won't build you many connections. LSE on the other hand is a strong university, and a well-respected one at that. Especially given your career goals. Plus, London is amazing. Your GPA will get you into a better school than Nottingham, and LSE is one such school. Have you looked at Oxbridge at all? Between your 3.8 and experience, you'd seem to have a good shot.

I can't speak on the China-based programs though.

[General Tso]

Do you know of any schools that allow you to obtain a joint degree with any university anywhere? Thanks!

Yes but they are probably below your standards. Hastings, where I attend, allows this. There must be at least one or two T14 schools that allow it as well.

I think if I found some really cheap master's program in Germany or Sweden or something I could actually save money by skipping on a semester's worth of tuition at Hastings (around $21k my 3L year). But I won't do it, because I am concerned about tainting my already weak JD with concerns of flight risk, and I am also not sure how it would affect my job search/interview schedule assuming I strike out at OCI (which I am assuming I will).

[namename]

Excellent advice. I looked into Cambridge, but their offerings are a bit too theoretical and not practical enough to justify the expense. Oxford has some interesting options though. I can see your point re: Nottingham. What do you think about UCL?

@General Tso: What type of law are you looking to get into, where do you want to practice and why are you worried about flight risk? A common thing that firms worry about?

[General Tso]

Excellent advice. I looked into Cambridge, but their offerings are a bit too theoretical and not practical enough to justify the expense. Oxford has some interesting options though. I can see your point re: Nottingham. What do you think about UCL?

@General Tso: What type of law are you looking to get into, where do you want to practice and why are you worried about flight risk? A common thing that firms worry about?

I am not looking for international law...I only considered a dual degree as a form of saving money. But I won't be doing it for the reasons I already stated.

I think firms do worry about flight risk, and sometimes an extra degree can seem like a stain on your resume. Read the Anna Ivey article about the guy who got an LLM in International Law or something and no firm would hire him.

[namename]

"I think firms do worry about flight risk, and sometimes an extra degree can seem like a stain on your resume. Read the Anna Ivey article about the guy who got an LLM in International Law or something and no firm would hire him."

Anna Ivey article -- link or source? tia.

[General Tso]

"I think firms do worry about flight risk, and sometimes an extra degree can seem like a stain on your resume. Read the Anna Ivey article about the guy who got an LLM in International Law or something and no firm would hire him."

Anna Ivey article -- link or source? tia.

http://www.annaivey.com/iveyfiles/2008/ ... e_the_hype
http://www.annaivey.com/iveyfiles/2008/ ... e_the_hype

[General Tso]

Don't get too discouraged by these articles. From what i've read/heard, there is REAL work to be had in China and at big firms for those who speak Mandarin. China is generally the one exception to the rule that JD holders shouldn't be looking for international work.

[TaipeiMort]

I am a Chinese speaker a BA in Chinese as well as another BS in Business. I also have a good amount of Chinese and ROC business experience. I have pondered the idea of a joint degree much. I will be attended The University of Chicago Law School this September. After some research and discussion, I've come to a two conclusions of my own:

1) Having GREAT Chinese speaking ability and specialized knowledge in a particular area of Chinese business or foreign policy (in my case operations and manufacturing) makes you instantly marketable coming out of a T14 law school. If you'd like to practice in any of the fields you mentioned, this is an amazing time to pull the trigger and go to law school- the job market has constricted and because of your abilities and marketability, this is the time to move.

2) A joint professional or humanities degree (especially an MA in Chinese) with a JD will do next to nothing for you in terms of marketability. In fact, the sense I get is that they feel your primary professional knowledgebase (JD) is tainted by a joint degree.

This is especially true with Chinese ability. If you can take the HSK, OPI, or another Chinese examination and do well you don't need an MA in Chinese. If you have quantifiable international experience in China, an MA will likewise not matter in another field such as international relations. Instead, I would research or publish a particular China-related field, or gain more professional experience during your 1L and 2L summers.

[webbylu87]

Excellent advice. I looked into Cambridge, but their offerings are a bit too theoretical and not practical enough to justify the expense. Oxford has some interesting options though. I can see your point re: Nottingham. What do you think about UCL?

UCL is a great school as well. I have several friends doing MAs there. Do you have any particular in mind?

[namename]

1) Having GREAT Chinese speaking ability and specialized knowledge in a particular area of Chinese business or foreign policy (in my case operations and manufacturing) makes you instantly marketable coming out of a T14 law school. If you'd like to practice in any of the fields you mentioned, this is an amazing time to pull the trigger and go to law school- the job market has constricted and because of your abilities and marketability, this is the time to move.

2) A joint professional or humanities degree (especially an MA in Chinese) with a JD will do next to nothing for you in terms of marketability. In fact, the sense I get is that they feel your primary professional knowledgebase (JD) is tainted by a joint degree.

This is especially true with Chinese ability. If you can take the HSK, OPI, or another Chinese examination and do well you don't need an MA in Chinese. If you have quantifiable international experience in China, an MA will likewise not matter in another field such as international relations. Instead, I would research or publish a particular China-related field, or gain more professional experience during your 1L and 2L summers.

Thank you for your response! I have some questions. When you say "they feel", who is the subject? Also, FWIW it is difficult to get into a position to do substantive research or publish on any public policy topic without a graduate degree. It is not impossible (I have been published on an unrelated subject), but opportunities are few and far between. In my mind, I find it hard to believe that the Senate Finance Committee would rather someone have a JD instead of JD/MA International Economics. Do you have public policy experience? Again, thank you for the advice.

[namename]

Excellent advice. I looked into Cambridge, but their offerings are a bit too theoretical and not practical enough to justify the expense. Oxford has some interesting options though. I can see your point re: Nottingham. What do you think about UCL?

UCL is a great school as well. I have several friends doing MAs there. Do you have any particular in mind?

I like the looks of their MSc Economic Policy and their MSc International Public Policy.

I am also considering the Australian universities. ANU has a Master of International Law/Master of Diplomacy that focuses on transnational diplomacy. Who knows at this point, however. I may just go teach in China for a year or just take language classes or continue my professional career for another year at a different organization. Many options and a lot to think about.

Thanks for the advice though.

[General Tso]

can you explain why you've ruled out the prominent US international affairs programs (SIPA, SAIS, etc), and why specifically you want a JD?

[namename]

SIPA SAIS etc haven't been ruled out, per se. Here are some reasons I am hesitant to go that route:

1. Cost: For example, SAIS costs $35,000/year. Most US programs take two years, so that is $70,000. Factor in opp. cost of an extra year of school and you are approaching $100,000. On the other hand, LSE's MSc Global Politics costs $22,452 and takes one year.
2. Value: Living in London, HK or Singapore would be an amazing experience, further demonstrate my practical knowledge of the international arena (esp. if I interned abroad), and would allow me to grow my network of international contacts (pretty crucial for getting jobs abroad).
3. GRE: First, the GRE is a ridiculous exam and I would not be happy about having to go through that completely pointless exercise. I have taken math courses at the graduate level, know SAS and have practiced econometrics. And yet, to do well on the GRE, I would have to go back and review geometry formulas and identities that I will never need to use (and if I did, I would just look them up). Second, I just took the LSAT and don't want to study for another standardized test so soon afterwards.
4. Law School: I have the grades and scores to go to a very well regarded law school, which translates well to the policy/public interest arena. No need to pay $70k for a designer masters degree if my law degree will carry strong recognition. That isn't to say that SIPA isn't worth it...I think that it comes very close. Those are incredible programs with amazing benefits attached. I am just not very convinced right now that they make the most sense in my situation.

Why Law School: It is a bit difficult to explain, but I enjoy what I know of the law. It is a great mix of practice and theory, and it has some cutting edge areas (Law and Econ, Law and Policy, Law and Philosophy) that are starting to really affect the policy world. Also, it affords a certain degree of prestige and flexibility, and the ability to make some serious money if need be. More could be said, but I think that covers it.

[IBThatGuy]

Why Law School: It is a bit difficult to explain, but I enjoy what I know of the law. It is a great mix of practice and theory, and it has some cutting edge areas (Law and Econ, Law and Policy, Law and Philosophy) that are starting to really affect the policy world. Also, it affords a certain degree of prestige and flexibility, and the ability to make some serious money if need be. More could be said, but I think that covers it.

This might sound pissy at first, but don't read it that way. Also, full disclosure: 0L.

1. The areas you've conjoined there aren't starting to affect the policy world. They have shaped policy since their inception.
2. As I understand it, law school offers very little in terms of specializing in those areas.
3. For the love of all that is prudent, do not get a master's degree in philosophy. Unless you plan on getting a Ph.D., don't do it; unless you plan on teaching (read as: "Unless you plan on a miserable shot at trying to secure a tenure-tack position"), do not go for the Ph.D.
4. Don't go into law for the money. Far from a consensus, but a common-enough opinion is that it's a serious investment without a sure-bet return on the investment.
5. Don't do it for the prestige; that just makes you an anus.
6. I think it is also a common view that, in practice, law is not a great mix of practice and theory; it's a practice.
7. All that said, you could get a J.D. and a Ph.D., and you might make a dynamite law professor; then, you're talking something more like attending to both theory and practice. It sounds like that's where your heart is, which is excellent (and, truth be told, the world might be a better place if more policymakers shared your values).

[namename]

Thanks for the thoughts.

1. I was speaking in the grand scope, i.e. last 30 years or so. More recently, law and econ is taking an interesting turn with the advances in behavioral economics and similar fields.
2. I think you are mostly right, but there are some very good exceptions. Vanderbilt has a PhD in Law and Economics. UCLA has the Epstein Program and the UCLA/RAND inst. Michigan has great exposure to Chinese law and policy. Many other schools have programs coming online.
3. Wouldn't get one in philosophy. I am looking at economics, public policy, or international relations.
4. From what I have read, you are probably right. Nevertheless, hopping in and out of policy/law/lobbying is easier with a JD.
5. Going into law for the prestige is not laudable. However, prestige can be, like money or charm or connections, a means to an end. For better or worse, you (and your ideas) will be taken more seriously with a Penn JD than with a simple BA, ceteris paribus.
6. IMHO the practice of law is practice, but the law itself is an interesting mix of history, philosophy and circumstance. Speaking only for myself, I would rather read Rosenkranz's The Subjects of the Constitution than an article in a trade journal.

All that said, I agree with most of what you said. Definitely have to be careful and know what you are getting into when deciding to go to graduate school, and law school especially. Thanks again.

[samsonyte16]

*