As someone who worked in biglaw, I have to disagree with the advice that Yale would be better than UCLA for law school. They would be considered essentially equal. All law schools care about is gpa and lsat scores, with the possible exception of Yale law school which likes to take a lot of its own. Generally, T10 law schools seek diversity geographically and among undergrad institutions in their applicants. Law firms care far more about the pedigree of an applicant’s law school than undergrad. If op is set on attending law school, UCLA for undergrad would likely make more sense due to the cost savings.
On the other hand, op seems also to be influenced by an “imposter syndrome” where she worries she won’t do well at Yale. It is far harder to be admitted to an Ivy than to do well there, so while it is an understandable worry, it isn’t a realistic one.
I don’t really understand all the posts pushing op into an IB/consulting career path she says she doesn’t want.
You can go to law school from any college, but if you look at top 5 law school classes you will see that they are disproportionately-- by a large margin – filled with Ivy League graduates.
So, eg, Stanford Law, where I went, probably has about 10 harvard students and 10 yale students attend each year. The University of Rochester, where I also went, might get a graduate in every 10-15 years.
Maybe, but she isn’t considering Rochester. UCLA grads aren’t going to be at a disadvantage in law school admissions. I also went to a T5 law school and the most students from any one school were 7 (Harvard) and then there was no more than 3 or 4 from any one school. The vast majority of students were the only representative from their undergrad in the class.**
Yes, those were my initial beliefs about law school too… that only GPA and LSAT scores mattered.
I do suffer from imposter syndrome, so thank you for the reminder that staying at Yale is easier than getting up. But I wouldn’t exactly equate staying to succeeding either…?
I’m still trying to figure out the whole IB thing. On one hand, it seems like a huge safety net and the best option financially. On the other hand, I just read a book last week that criticized the industry for being intellectually detrimental to high-education graduates.
My child was neither First Gen or Low Income, so I cannot comment on how effective this program is, but Yale offers a lot of resources to various groups, including First Gen.
There are also dozens of programs that offer stipends for summer research and/or travel, even for students who do not receive any financial aid. The stipends my child received covered his living costs for the summer but didn’t leave him with a great deal of savings. This may not appeal to you if you are trying to land a high-paying internship.
Undergraduate Learning Assistant positions (TA, at other schools) are available to those w/o any financial need, and can easily net $200/week during the school term, but not available until the fourth or fifth semesters typically.
If the OP is going to turn down Yale because of concerns for parental finances, then getting a high-paying job (i.e., consulting or IB) for a few years and repaying them is a viable option to make Yale possible. How many 17 or 18 years old know anything about any of these fields?
It sounds as if she has researched it. However, as an adult, I know something about these careers, and would be hesitant to push anyone into a job with an 80 hour work week if they weren’t truly interested in the field.
As an adult, I also know these careers and multiple people working in all of them and have no hesitation of encouraging 20-somethings to work hard to repay their parents if that’s what enables them to attend Yale.
Yale and your parents think your family can afford full cost. So I’m guessing income and assets support that assessment.
I understand 300k is a lot of money. But I think you need to do an analysis of if the marginal cost of Yale is unreasonable for your family. Have you done that, based on income and expenses?
If your parents had 300k in a 529 would you be fine? Why isn’t the real estate equity viewed the same way?
I wouldn’t borrow based on the expectation of forgiveness but at the same time your parents and Yale might have a better understanding than you do of your family’s financial position.
If it’s a matter of your parents needing to retire one year later, well that might sound horrible to you but as a parent I can tell you I’d do that every time and enjoy it.
ETA: By all means if you think Yale missed something I’d call and talk to them. Let them know it doesn’t seem affordable. Mistakes do happen and they definitely can adjust based on circumstances.
I agree with @cinnamon1212. I was also a partner at BigLaw and very involved with hiring. I linked an interesting article on this thread about where Supreme Court clerks attended undergrad. More relevant, the article also cited where Harvard law school students went undergrad . NYT Article on Supreme Court Clerkships and Undergrad College (NYT article gifted within that thread).
From the article:
"The study, which considered 22,475 Harvard Law graduates, took account of three data points: where they went to college, whether they qualified for academic honors in law school (graduating cum laude, magna cum laude or summa cum laude) and whether they obtained a Supreme Court clerkship.
About half of the graduates had attended one of 22 selective undergraduate institutions, and more than a fifth of the graduates had gone to college at Harvard, Yale or Princeton."
Sure Harvard law grads come from all varieties of schools, but the top 22, and especially HYP, over indexed beyond what you can account for if only GPA and LSAT scores were considered.
I was aware that a high proportion of T14 law graduates came from HYP, but I thought that was only because HYP selected the best of the best (so naturally…)
This somehow makes me feel better in my decision. I’ll definitely use this a factor in my confidence of where I’ll ultimately attend. Thanks.
I agree with the article’s premise that five law schools are disproportionately represented among Supreme Court clerks, and if the Supreme Court and appellate litigation is op’s goal, attending one of these law schools would really help. A major flaw in the study, however is that it is based on four decades of Supreme Court hiring. Law school admissions has changed significantly over that time. The old boy’s club was a lot stronger in the 1980s than today.
Moreover, even according to the article, less than half of the Harvard law students came from one of the 21 selective colleges they focused on. So, the majority of the class not only didn’t attend an Ivy, they also didn’t attend the additional 14 schools someone deemed selective. Does UCLA fall within the 21 selective colleges? It doesn’t seem to indicate in the article.
Yale isn’t $300k and the likelihood of one becoming a big time attorney or I banker, even from Yale, isn’t huge. Plus, even if they were, their law school costs add another several hundred thousand potentially.
It could be based on Yale’s not giving of need aid that OP’s parents are well off and the tuition price isn’t an issue. Many kids don’t know their parents financials. It could be OP is value conscious without realizing.
I’m unsure what this means. For undergrad…it’s over $80,000 a year…so definitely $300,000 or more.
Law school is “only” 3 years. Tuition alone is about $70,000 a year…add in living expenses, and I’m betting those three years will be very close to $300,000
I don’t agree. This is a decision that is completely up to this family. I’m sure there were people who wondered why we paid full ticket for two kids at pricey private colleges. Well…because we decided it was worth it and we did.
The OP also said the parents believe that loan forgiveness will take care of the finances, and didn’t attend college themselves. I’ve been on enough parent Facebook pages to know that there are so many families who really don’t understand the loan process. I think the OP needs to ask the parents HOW they plan to pay. So many folks just say they’ll figure it out.
)