Fully from left field... HLS vs Chicago? Forum

[lurkin_hard]

Shadowfax was responding to the previous poster's assertion that the Ruby was the better option even without taking money into consideration

Even that is somewhat doubtful. Harvard doesn't have the >50% Fed Clerkship rate that 2017's Rubenstein Scholars had.

Comparing Ruby recipients to average Harvard students doesn't really make sense. Their outcomes are good primarily because they do very well at Chicago. Presumably they would also do very well at Harvard.

[Alexandros]

.

[UVA2B]

Shadowfax was responding to the previous poster's assertion that the Ruby was the better option even without taking money into consideration

Even that is somewhat doubtful. Harvard doesn't have the >50% Fed Clerkship rate that 2017's Rubenstein Scholars had.

Comparing Ruby recipients to average Harvard students doesn't really make sense. Their outcomes are good primarily because they do very well at Chicago. Presumably they would also do very well at Harvard.

Do GPA and LSAT really correlate that well with law school success? That seems hard to accept.

There is a positive correlation when both GPA/LSAT are above medians, around a 0.3-0.6 if I remember correctly. I'm on my phone, but you can google the study LSAC did on LSAT and law school grades correlation for class of 2014.

[Paul Campos]

The claim that the top 600-700 of the 1700 JD students at HLS have similar or better stats than Ruby recipients (I'll ignore for these purposes that this is obviously a made up number) can be rephrased as "the median HLS matric has worse stats than the median Ruby matric."

I have extensive experience with one form of elite legal hiring, and in that context a full tuition scholarship at CCN is certainly considered more impressive than a generic HYS degree. But even if a Ruby is "only" as impressive as a generic HLS JD, the whole notion that somebody would consider taking on an extra $250K of costs for (at best) an equivalent degree is insane. You're paying a quarter of a million dollars extra for what is, giving HLS every benefit of the doubt, essentially the same degree in terms of future value.

[oopsu812]

This thread is unbelievable. Prestige is sexy, and I get that people try their best to justify taking HYS over other amazing options, I'm sure I would too, but at the end of the day it's the Ruby ffs. It's an incredible legal education, in a fantastic location, free. It's the stuff of dreams.

[Alexandros]

.

[Po$eidon]

I cannot get why anyone would turn down the Ruby barring life circumstances that make moving to Chicago untenable (basically, either a nearby dying relative or a married SO). Turning down a Vanderbilt or a Hammy for HLS seems absurd to me and they don't come with cost of living perks. Turning down the Ruby? Unconscionable

[dabigchina]

This thread is unbelievable. Prestige is sexy, and I get that people try their best to justify taking HYS over other amazing options, I'm sure I would too, but at the end of the day it's the Ruby ffs. It's an incredible legal education, in a fantastic location, free. It's the stuff of dreams.

ITT: people who chose HYS over Hamilton/Ruby regret their life choices.

[TudoBem]

Hey OP are you back from UChicago? I would love to hear back from you.

[Npret]

This thread is unbelievable. Prestige is sexy, and I get that people try their best to justify taking HYS over other amazing options, I'm sure I would too, but at the end of the day it's the Ruby ffs. It's an incredible legal education, in a fantastic location, free. It's the stuff of dreams.

ITT: people who chose HYS over Hamilton/Ruby regret their life choices.

They realize that they weren't elite enough to recognize the true prestigious choice. Also, they owe a fortune.

[Phil Brooks]

It's people like OP (and all of his/her defenders) who contribute to law school tuition being as high as it is. If everybody who got a full scholarship from T14 and strong regional schools turned down HYS, HYS would have to bring down its price, and all other schools would follow suit. HYS keeps its price at unconscionable levels because they know prestige-chasing suckers will gladly pay for the prestige. It screws up the market for the rest of us.

So if anyone is aghast at the "hostility" displayed here towards OP, this is one of the reasons.

[TudoBem]

I am confused..Is OP going to Harvard for sure?

[Phil Brooks]

I am confused..Is OP going to Harvard for sure?

I'm betting that OP will. The fact that OP even views this as a choice reveals what OP's priorities are.

[shadowfax]

It's people like OP (and all of his/her defenders) who contribute to law school tuition being as high as it is. If everybody who got a full scholarship from T14 and strong regional schools turned down HYS, HYS would have to bring down its price, and all other schools would follow suit. HYS keeps its price at unconscionable levels because they know prestige-chasing suckers will gladly pay for the prestige. It screws up the market for the rest of us.

So if anyone is aghast at the "hostility" displayed here towards OP, this is one of the reasons.

Fake news...the opposite of truth.

I like the Ruby. It is funded by a rich guy who left the law for alternative asset management. Not easy these days. It should be a business school scholly. Anyway unlike most named awards that are on the back of the great unwashed run of the mill matriculate this one is pure. The pricing in the education market is the fault of the government lending money to go to any school regardless of potential employment or default rates. Democracy in action. HYS have the best form of aid. Need based.

[Phil Brooks]

It's people like OP (and all of his/her defenders) who contribute to law school tuition being as high as it is. If everybody who got a full scholarship from T14 and strong regional schools turned down HYS, HYS would have to bring down its price, and all other schools would follow suit. HYS keeps its price at unconscionable levels because they know prestige-chasing suckers will gladly pay for the prestige. It screws up the market for the rest of us.

So if anyone is aghast at the "hostility" displayed here towards OP, this is one of the reasons.

Fake news...the opposite of truth.

I like the Ruby. It is funded by a rich guy who left the law for alternative asset management. Not easy these days. It should be a business school scholly. Anyway unlike most named awards that are on the back of the great unwashed run of the mill matriculate this one is pure. The pricing in the education market is the fault of the government lending money to go to any school regardless of potential employment or default rates. Democracy in action. HYS have the best form of aid. Need based.

There can be more than one cause for the same phenomenon. Government-lending is one cause of high tuition prices. Lack of price sensitivity among prestige-chasing students is another cause.

Regarding government lending, I agree with you. My solution to that would be not to eliminate government loans, but for the government to make its loans available only to schools that cap increases in their tuition or that, heaven forbid, lower their tuition. The government can do this as a market participant. And you'd be amazed the types of hoops schools will jump through to keep sucking on the government teat. They will lower their prices.

Eliminating government loans altogether will in the short-term just foreclose law school to all but the wealthy students.

Need-based aid creates its own set of perverse incentives. One kid whose parents save for the first 22 years of the kid's life will not be able to claim need-based aid, while another kid whose parents spent during that time can. One kid whose parents freely choose to take lower-paying jobs can claim need-based aid, while another kid whose parents don't can't.

It's better just to have one affordable price for all.

[HonestlyThough]

Not original OP here, but the OP who re-sparked this conversation after getting admitted and offered the Ruby last week.

I did just return from Chicago. It's a freezing cold city, but also a beautiful and interesting one. And it's way cleaner than New York and SF. (New York smells so horrible). The University of Chicago's law school is really ugly, as a side note. And tiny. And a bit low on amentities.

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

The class they had me sit in on had a worse professor than the ones I saw at Berkeley, NYU, and Harvard. But, on the flip side, students do seem to have ready access to their professors and will stop to chat with them in the hall.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

To answer the question, I like Harvard far more after visiting but have still not collected and looked over enough information to finalize my choice.

Regarding the money, none of you seem to evaluate debt in the way I do.
The Ruby is not money in my pocket. I will be low enough income after Harvard that, over the 10 years after graduation, Harvard would very likely be paying at least the value of my Ruby (likely more) on my behalf to pay off my loans. At UChi, I'd still leave with about $50K in debt. There's a very real possibility that I would not be in LRAP qualifying employment (by Chi's rules), so I'd be paying that $50K back myself on a salary low enough to make a 10 year repayment plan a bit difficult financially. If I couldn't afford the 10 year plan, I'd be in the shit land of negative amortization and would deal with the tax penalty at IBR forgiveness. My $50K in debt would balloon larger, and I'd be on the hook to pay it all off. (Or a good chunk of it, depending on how much time, if any, I was in LRAP-qualifying employment). Even if you qualify under Chi's LRAP, they only bay IBR payments, so if you want to avoid negative amortization, you're gonna have to fork over more out of pocket.

[Nebby]

Not original OP here, but the OP who re-sparked this conversation after getting admitted and offered the Ruby last week.

I did just return from Chicago. It's a freezing cold city, but also a beautiful and interesting one. And it's way cleaner than New York and SF. (New York smells so horrible). The University of Chicago's law school is really ugly, as a side note. And tiny. And a bit low on amentities.

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

The class they had me sit in on had a worse professor than the ones I saw at Berkeley, NYU, and Harvard. But, on the flip side, students do seem to have ready access to their professors and will stop to chat with them in the hall.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

To answer the question, I like Harvard far more after visiting but have still not collected and looked over enough information to finalize my choice.

Regarding the money, none of you seem to evaluate debt in the way I do.
The Ruby is not money in my pocket. I will be low enough income after Harvard that, over the 10 years after graduation, Harvard would very likely be paying at least the value of my Ruby (likely more) on my behalf to pay off my loans. At UChi, I'd still leave with about $50K in debt. There's a very real possibility that I would not be in LRAP qualifying employment (by Chi's rules), so I'd be paying that $50K back myself on a salary low enough to make a 10 year repayment plan a bit difficult financially. If I couldn't afford the 10 year plan, I'd be in the shit land of negative amortization and would deal with the tax penalty at IBR forgiveness. My $50K in debt would balloon larger, and I'd be on the hook to pay it all off. (Or a good chunk of it, depending on how much time, if any, I was in LRAP-qualifying employment). Even if you qualify under Chi's LRAP, they only bay IBR payments, so if you want to avoid negative amortization, you're gonna have to fork over more out of pocket.

What type of PI employment are you looking at?

[HonestlyThough]

Not original OP here, but the OP who re-sparked this conversation after getting admitted and offered the Ruby last week.

I did just return from Chicago. It's a freezing cold city, but also a beautiful and interesting one. And it's way cleaner than New York and SF. (New York smells so horrible). The University of Chicago's law school is really ugly, as a side note. And tiny. And a bit low on amentities.

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

The class they had me sit in on had a worse professor than the ones I saw at Berkeley, NYU, and Harvard. But, on the flip side, students do seem to have ready access to their professors and will stop to chat with them in the hall.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

To answer the question, I like Harvard far more after visiting but have still not collected and looked over enough information to finalize my choice.

Regarding the money, none of you seem to evaluate debt in the way I do.
The Ruby is not money in my pocket. I will be low enough income after Harvard that, over the 10 years after graduation, Harvard would very likely be paying at least the value of my Ruby (likely more) on my behalf to pay off my loans. At UChi, I'd still leave with about $50K in debt. There's a very real possibility that I would not be in LRAP qualifying employment (by Chi's rules), so I'd be paying that $50K back myself on a salary low enough to make a 10 year repayment plan a bit difficult financially. If I couldn't afford the 10 year plan, I'd be in the shit land of negative amortization and would deal with the tax penalty at IBR forgiveness. My $50K in debt would balloon larger, and I'd be on the hook to pay it all off. (Or a good chunk of it, depending on how much time, if any, I was in LRAP-qualifying employment). Even if you qualify under Chi's LRAP, they only bay IBR payments, so if you want to avoid negative amortization, you're gonna have to fork over more out of pocket.

What type of PI employment are you looking at?

Something more policy focused, especially a few years out. I need to explore impact litigation, movement lawyering, and public policy all a bit more to find out the right fit for me. There's a very good chance I'll spend time in a 501(c)(3), but plenty of likelihood I'll do work in orgs with other tax-statuses. My work the past few years has been at the intersection of politics (elected officials), policy, legal aid, and interest groups.

[lawlorbust]

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

I mean, yes, it's kind of shitty for the plebs that UChi plays favorites, but this is ... a plus for you? I'm not sure why you should feel uncomfortable at all.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

Yes and no? Sure, there are guys at HLS that on day 1 I would've put money on would succeed, based on some combination of pedigree and just how damn smart they are. But there are many more who've always been the best at whatever they've done until they've come to HLS. If your idea of success is a conventional one, then RA-ing for Tribe or getting a feeder clerkship is as much your effort / how hard you work as it is the sort of competition you run up against. If your interests are more idiosyncratic--IDK, getting a fellowship at HRW or something--then sure, I suppose that's more in your hands.

[HonestlyThough]

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

I mean, yes, it's kind of shitty for the plebs that UChi plays favorites, but this is ... a plus for you? I'm not sure why you should feel uncomfortable at all.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

Yes and no? Sure, there are guys at HLS that on day 1 I would've put money on would succeed, based on some combination of pedigree and just how damn smart they are. But there are many more who've always been the best at whatever they've done until they've come to HLS. If your idea of success is a conventional one, then RA-ing for Tribe or getting a feeder clerkship is as much your effort / how hard you work as it is the sort of competition you run up against. If your interests are more idiosyncratic--IDK, get a fellowship at HRW or something--then sure, that gets to be more in your hands.

Cause that seems like a weird dynamic to have this special class of students? I like that the most accomplished/desired admits who matriculate at harvard are then in the same boat as the last people off the WL. that's more my vibe.

of course the quality of your competition matters, but how well you do is what ultimately decides your outcomes.

[lawlorbust]

of course the quality of your competition matters, but how well you do is what ultimately decides your outcomes.

I'm not sure you understood a word of what I wrote.

[HonestlyThough]

of course the quality of your competition matters, but how well you do is what ultimately decides your outcomes.

I'm not sure you understood a word of what I wrote.

feel free to clarify, but I'm fairly sure I did. It seemed that you were saying that many HLS students have always been successful and at the top, and now they find themselves in a pond of the same size fish. For the more competitive outcomes, their work matters as much as how hard other HLS students fight for those same things and how their intelligence/grades/etc matches up against that competition.

[Npret]

You want to go to Harvard. You don't understand debt that you have to be employed and repay LIPP or not. LIPP isn't a magic wand to make your debt and the pressure of carrying it disappear.

It's great you went to Chicago and now you have a list of reasons why you shouldn't go. I find most of them easily dismissed compared to the advantages and prestige of the Ruby, but then I (and most of the posters here) seem to understand money and debt in a different way than you do.

At least you visited at the cost of $1000 which I respect. I don't agree with your choice and I honestly believe there will be times in the future when you regret it.

Still you gave it a shot.

[Dcc617]

Not original OP here, but the OP who re-sparked this conversation after getting admitted and offered the Ruby last week.

I did just return from Chicago. It's a freezing cold city, but also a beautiful and interesting one. And it's way cleaner than New York and SF. (New York smells so horrible). The University of Chicago's law school is really ugly, as a side note. And tiny. And a bit low on amentities.

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

The class they had me sit in on had a worse professor than the ones I saw at Berkeley, NYU, and Harvard. But, on the flip side, students do seem to have ready access to their professors and will stop to chat with them in the hall.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

To answer the question, I like Harvard far more after visiting but have still not collected and looked over enough information to finalize my choice.

Regarding the money, none of you seem to evaluate debt in the way I do.
The Ruby is not money in my pocket. I will be low enough income after Harvard that, over the 10 years after graduation, Harvard would very likely be paying at least the value of my Ruby (likely more) on my behalf to pay off my loans. At UChi, I'd still leave with about $50K in debt. There's a very real possibility that I would not be in LRAP qualifying employment (by Chi's rules), so I'd be paying that $50K back myself on a salary low enough to make a 10 year repayment plan a bit difficult financially. If I couldn't afford the 10 year plan, I'd be in the shit land of negative amortization and would deal with the tax penalty at IBR forgiveness. My $50K in debt would balloon larger, and I'd be on the hook to pay it all off. (Or a good chunk of it, depending on how much time, if any, I was in LRAP-qualifying employment). Even if you qualify under Chi's LRAP, they only bay IBR payments, so if you want to avoid negative amortization, you're gonna have to fork over more out of pocket.

Haha this is dumb.

[Npret]

Not original OP here, but the OP who re-sparked this conversation after getting admitted and offered the Ruby last week.

I did just return from Chicago. It's a freezing cold city, but also a beautiful and interesting one. And it's way cleaner than New York and SF. (New York smells so horrible). The University of Chicago's law school is really ugly, as a side note. And tiny. And a bit low on amentities.

There's pretty solid support for Ruby's, sorta to the point that makes me feel uncomfortable about how they're treated vs. the rest of UChi. If you look at clerkships, Rubies account for about 16 of the 36 in the most recent graduating class. 75% of Ruby's clerk compared to like 12% of the remainder of the class. I went to a giant public undergrad, so maybe that's why I find the hand-holding and favoritism a bit strange.

The class they had me sit in on had a worse professor than the ones I saw at Berkeley, NYU, and Harvard. But, on the flip side, students do seem to have ready access to their professors and will stop to chat with them in the hall.

Re: outcomes - looking at overall outcomes for the school doesn't make sense. My ability to succeed is not correlated to the average outcome of a Chicago or Harvard student. It's far more up to me and how hard I work to get top grades or how much effort I put into cultivating relationships with professors and taking advantage of opportunities. Both schools have the ability to help me make connections with judges and employers, and both schools are well-respected enough to serve me well. Once I'm there, my stats no longer matter and it's up to me to make the most or least of my time.

To answer the question, I like Harvard far more after visiting but have still not collected and looked over enough information to finalize my choice.

Regarding the money, none of you seem to evaluate debt in the way I do.
The Ruby is not money in my pocket. I will be low enough income after Harvard that, over the 10 years after graduation, Harvard would very likely be paying at least the value of my Ruby (likely more) on my behalf to pay off my loans. At UChi, I'd still leave with about $50K in debt. There's a very real possibility that I would not be in LRAP qualifying employment (by Chi's rules), so I'd be paying that $50K back myself on a salary low enough to make a 10 year repayment plan a bit difficult financially. If I couldn't afford the 10 year plan, I'd be in the shit land of negative amortization and would deal with the tax penalty at IBR forgiveness. My $50K in debt would balloon larger, and I'd be on the hook to pay it all off. (Or a good chunk of it, depending on how much time, if any, I was in LRAP-qualifying employment). Even if you qualify under Chi's LRAP, they only bay IBR payments, so if you want to avoid negative amortization, you're gonna have to fork over more out of pocket.

Haha this is dumb.

I know but we can't fight the Harvard glow that OP wants to bask in. Not even with the best law school outcome.