Boalt's tuition next year. 66,000+ IN STATE, 74000 OOS
Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 11:04 am
Released for current students yesterday.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=116667
Surely that includes cost of living expenses? Right?peeved wrote:Released for current students yesterday.
that's still a lot.....what is the total cost of attendance for the year for out of state students?tamlyric wrote:Surely that includes cost of living expenses? Right?peeved wrote:Released for current students yesterday.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/6943.htmWhen the Regents approved the fee increases for the 2010-11 academic year, they were also provided proposed fee level increases for the 2011-12 and 2012 academic years. Thus, total resident fees for Berkeley Law students during the 2010-11 academic year will be $44,220 and the estimated total resident fees for the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years will be $49,347 and $51,815 respectively.
...
For nonresident students, total nonresident fees will be $52,220 for the 2010-2011 academic year. During the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years, the proposed nonresident fees will be $54,830 and $57,573 respectively. Nonresidents should note that it is possible to establish California residency for tuition purposes during the first year of law school. Information about establishing residency is to be available at http://registrar.berkeley.edu/ssvc.html.
I wish I were cool enough to be gay, but they won't let me.GermX wrote:Whyw ould anyone go to Berkley anyways, its gay.
It includes COL.Feynman wrote:Obviously the OP is off (or including CoL).
Boalt's tuition is ridiculous though, especially with the high cost of living in Berkeley (and low quality of life). Their tuition surge coupled with California's implosion make me wonder how long Berkeley can hold onto the T10.
Do you think there's a shortage of kids willing to pay sticker for Berkeley? If you don't have the numbers for Stanford and want California what else are you going to do? This won't hurt them very much.Feynman wrote:Obviously the OP is off (or including CoL).
Boalt's tuition is ridiculous though, especially with the high cost of living in Berkeley (and low quality of life). Their tuition surge coupled with California's implosion make me wonder how long Berkeley can hold onto the T10.
Other things being equal, these tuition increases are going to hurt them. Why avoid the truth? Of course there will be any number of people willing to pay sticker. But for those candiates who get into multiple T10s (the desirable students), it's going to be a factor that weighs against Boalt, especially because Berkeley COL is so expensive in the first place.KibblesAndVick wrote:Do you think there's a shortage of kids willing to pay sticker for Berkeley? If you don't have the numbers for Stanford and want California what else are you going to do? This won't hurt them very much.Feynman wrote:Obviously the OP is off (or including CoL).
Boalt's tuition is ridiculous though, especially with the high cost of living in Berkeley (and low quality of life). Their tuition surge coupled with California's implosion make me wonder how long Berkeley can hold onto the T10.
Additionally they could just readjust their index if push came to shove. Right now they put a heavy emphasis on GPA and "softs" compared to peer schools. They could just change the composition of their acceptances to secure their median numbers (like what UVA does with ED splitters or put less emphasis on character).
I think it's a fair assumption that the demand for a law degree from Berkeley is fairly inelastic. That is, as they jack the price, the demand will only drop slightly. One reason for this is the lack of alternatives. There are a lot of applicants from California who don't want to live on the East Coast for three years. Within the T-14 this limits their options. If they want to stay in Cali and can't get Stanford, they don't have a better option. Moreover, many applicants are from wealthy families and won't base their admissions decision on the tuition changes. Finally, the bottom of the class that pays sticker subsidizes the top that gets scholarships. If you're getting a big tuition break you're in the same boat (or boalt) as the rich kids. That is, money isn't the issue. There are other reasons why demand wound be inelastic such as the misguided perception of some applicants that they'll inevitably become a rich lawyer and this is just a bump in the road.Feynman wrote:Other things being equal, these tuition increases are going to hurt them. Why avoid the truth? Of course there will be any number of people willing to pay sticker. But for those candiates who get into multiple T10s (the desirable students), it's going to be a factor that weighs against Boalt, especially because Berkeley COL is so expensive in the first place.KibblesAndVick wrote:Do you think there's a shortage of kids willing to pay sticker for Berkeley? If you don't have the numbers for Stanford and want California what else are you going to do? This won't hurt them very much.Feynman wrote:Obviously the OP is off (or including CoL).
Boalt's tuition is ridiculous though, especially with the high cost of living in Berkeley (and low quality of life). Their tuition surge coupled with California's implosion make me wonder how long Berkeley can hold onto the T10.
Additionally they could just readjust their index if push came to shove. Right now they put a heavy emphasis on GPA and "softs" compared to peer schools. They could just change the composition of their acceptances to secure their median numbers (like what UVA does with ED splitters or put less emphasis on character).
Boalt's solid T10 status is a recent development. Sky-rocketing tuition might put that at risk.
Just a few years ago their 25% LSAT was in the low 160s, even though it was still the second best law school in Cali at the time. So the pull you describe isn't as strong as you think it is.I think it's a fair assumption that the demand for a law degree from Berkeley is fairly inelastic.
But they can manipulate the medians based on who they let in and who they don't. If we assume (1) there's a sizable pool of (relatively) high LSAT splitters at UCLA and USC and (2) enough of these students would rather attend Berkeley than USC/UCLA then it shouldn't be difficult for Berkeley to keep their medians constant by taking on splitters. The 170/3.4 student and the 166/3.75 student both lower the median GPA. But the 2nd student is at the LSAT median (I think, if the median is no longer 166 just think of an example with the new median) and the 1st would raise it. Currently, because they favor high GPAs, they are admitting a lot more of the "2nd" than the "1st". However, if they wanted to keep their medians constant they could just snipe off UCLA/USC students with high LSAT scores. This wouldn't hurt their median GPA because a 2.0 and a 3.7 do the exact same amount of damage.Feynman wrote:Just a few years ago their 25% LSAT was in the low 160s. You are wrong.I think it's a fair assumption that the demand for a law degree from Berkeley is fairly inelastic.
Looking at MVP that just isn't true. Total CoA is probably 20K cheaper or so for those schools (for all three years). I am guessing that gap will only expand as Berkeley continues to ratchet its tuition higher.bilbobaggins wrote:If y'all map out tuition + COL for Berk's competitors you'll see they're all very similar and that Berk used to be a bargain and is now comparable. Rankings aren't all they're cracked up to be. Boalt has solid placement in corporate, PI, academia and clerkships. Boalt has solid national placement. You can obsess over minute differences in hiring percentages all of you want or minute differences in rankings all you want, but Boalt and its peer schools are all very good and all of them provide solid career prospects.