<p>@OldCat based on what you said it sounds like successful people go to elite schools more than these schools produce elite individuals.</p>
<p>MrMom, you are seriously citing Charles Murray, of Bell Curve and “blacks are inferior to whites” fame? </p>
<p>In any case, “top 100 universities” is not necessarily the same as “elite universities,” at least as people define them here.</p>
<p>@Pizzagirl and @sally305: There is an immense difference between making decisions and “burning bridges” that may continually foreclose potential opportunities. To illustrate, that Yale Law graduate (we’ve utilized as a hypothetical example) is very likely to be able to find an entry-level legal job – and in a fine firm – anywhere in the country, whereas the top Arkansas JD may be able to compete for that same excellent entry-level position in only a limited number of venues. </p>
<p>Guys, you are confounding selection effort with treatment effect. </p>
<p>TopTier, you are still not getting it. EVERY choice you make forecloses another. Did you wear the blue shirt today? Great, then you missed the chance to see how your day would have gone in the gray one. NO ONE can keep all “potential opportunities” on the table forever. Life happens. </p>
<p>And BTW there was just a thread the other day in which someone cited a Harvard Law grad not being able to find work in a rural southern town…because he didn’t have “local” connections.</p>
<p>No, @sally305, every choice does not necessarily foreclose another (although that is sometime true – your shirt example – it is not universally correct). To illustrate, if I opt to eat a scrabbled egg for breakfast, that does not preclude my also eating a bowl of oatmeal (unless you want to create a zero-sum-game “straw-man” that limits breakfast to one item). While I certainly agree that no one can keep ALL “potential opportunities” open forever, we can – and we should – recognize that prematurely closing decisive opportunities is likely to have major, adverse, and longterm ramifications.</p>
<p>Oh, and by the way, at 68, with two highly successful careers completed, with literally thousands of employees and over a billion dollars of annual budget authority, and with senior leadership experiences in the Navy, at Lockheed Martin and at Duke, I suggest your “naiveté” comment is rather ludicrous. </p>
<p>Respectfully, chronological age and work experience have exactly zero to do with understanding what makes people happy. Maybe if you got out more, you might disabuse yourself of your notion that living and working in a place like Little Rock or Billings or Oklahoma City is “second-rate.” That’s pretty pretentious, don’t you think? </p>
<p>In any case, you still have not provided any evidence that people are happier or more successful when they attend “elite” schools. What are these “major, adverse, and longterm ramifications” you speak of?</p>
<p>ETA: There are many compilations of “regrets of the dying”–they are actually pretty interesting. I have yet to find one that says “I wish I had been more ambitious in my career.” I have found a lot that say “I wish I had worked less and had more time for my family and friends.” Here’s one.</p>
<p><a href=“Top five regrets of the dying revealed | Daily Mail Online”>Top five regrets of the dying revealed | Daily Mail Online;
<p>@TopTier: Actually, that makes it amazing, but still quite on the mark.</p>
<p>Yale Law would not close as many doors as, say, Tulane Law (and certainly would open more), but it does close some.
Would the combination of Princeton&Yale Law or LSU&Tulane Law open more doors for a non-native in Baton Rouge? I’d bet on the latter.</p>
<p>However, yes, if you’re not sure and cost isn’t part of the equation, more options are better, and yes, an elite school may get you the benefit of the doubt (and some networks are very powerful in certain circles), but if you are talented, people will recognize that and want you regardless of what schools you may or may not have gone to.</p>
<p>“Oh, and by the way, at 68, with two highly successful careers completed, with literally thousands of employees and over a billion dollars of annual budget authority, and with senior leadership experiences in the Navy, at Lockheed Martin and at Duke, I suggest your “naiveté” comment is rather ludicrous…”</p>
<p>You win life, then. Congratulations! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The blue shirt may have a blue collar, so perhaps it is unlikely that the more elitist posters around here would choose to wear such a thing that can signify what they may consider an even lower social status than having attended a non-elite university.</p>
<p>". Of course “your home area” (just look at the nation’s aggregate population distribution) is much more likely to be in metro Boston, San Francisco, New York, DC, Atlanta, etc. than in Little Rock, Wheeling, Oklahoma City, Billings, San Antonio, etc. I wonder what results you’d ascertain if you Googled Federal District Court judges in Massachusetts, New York, and so forth? I’ll wager they’d differ significantly from your Arkansas findings!"</p>
<p>If my home base is Arkansas and I want to stay there, what does it matter to me that for every one of me, there are ten people from Boston who consider Boston their home base and wish to stay there? How is that possibly relevant to me and my life? After all, the Bostonian desiring to stay in Boston doesn’t care about the fact that an Arkansan wants to stay in Arkansas. </p>
<p>@sally305: Please stop ascribing inaccurate quotations to me. I never – not once – stated any city "second rate.</p>
<p>TopTier, I am curious. Duke is not the “best” law school–in fact, it was only one of two in the top 20 to show a negative trend in hiring for last year’s grads according to the source below. Knowing this, would you consider it an adverse decision for a student to attend Duke over, say UVA? (Let’s ignore for a minute the wisdom of choosing law as a degree in the first place these days.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“Law Schools Where Grads Actually Get Jobs - Tipping The Scales”>http://tippingthescales.com/2014/03/law-schools-where-grads-get-jobs/</a></p>
<p>TT, you said this in the context of a larger discussion about the “what ifs” of turning down a chance to live/work in NYC, Boston, etc. My apologies if I misinterpreted your point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@sally305: Actually you did, That quotation focused on educational institutions, not on localities. </p>
<p>@sally305 (re #72): That is a good question, and I haven’t had the time adequately to consider it. However, not too long ago I read relatively recent report that rated Duke as the #2 Law School in mid-career, private sector pay (<a href=“The Best Law Schools - For Getting Rich - Above the Law”>A 4-Week Calendar for December LSAT Takers - Above the Law), behind only Stanford. Obviously, compensation is NOT the only – and, in my opinion, not the primary – career assessment element; however, neither is it irrelevant. I mention this report merely because a decision between UVa (rated #4 in the same report) and Duke (both truly outstanding Law Schools) would necessarily be based on many important factors. You’ve cited one, but clearly there are many others. I suspect that how those elements were comparatively weighed/prioritized – and that’s clearly an individual judgment – would be the ultimate determiner. </p>
<p>@Pizzagirl (re #70): "If my home base is Arkansas and I want to stay there, what does it matter to me … ". I agree, but only IF one can be absolutely sure that he will remain in Arkansas for the rest of his life. However, what happens if, at age 35, 45, or 55, one want to move (or has to move) due to serious personal or professional issues. To continue an now-overused illustration, the Yale lawyer will unquestionably have significant advantages that his University of Arkansas colleague does not enjoy (all other circumstances being equal). I believe this sort of long-range contingency planning makes a good deal of sense and it’s at the core of my “don’t burn any bridges” prematurely life-concept. </p>
<p>I can think of a number of middling students w disciplinary issues at GMTson’s prep school who went on to Harvard et al. They’ll do fine in life, not bcs of harvard, but bcs they have trust funds and famous last names.</p>
<p>@TopTier, actually, at 55 (or even 45 and maybe 35), I’m pretty certain that people would judge him/her more on their accomplishments, knowledge, and what they can do than where they went to school (and yes, I grant that the Yale network may still be helpful for introductions and that where you go for law or b-school is more important than where you went for undergrad). At least, that’s the way it works in finance for mid-career professionals.</p>
<p>@PurpleTitan (re #78): Of course I agree with you, which is precisely why I added the caveat, “all other circumstances being equal” (in #76). Now we both know “all other circumstances” are rarely going to approach (no less achieve) equality. However, my point – with which you have agreed several time, and I do appreciate your support – is that the NET benefits of a Yale Law education (to carry on this now over-used illustration) can be quite important, will endure, and they are likely to provide advantages that are most unlikely from (for example) Arkansas Law. </p>