Heart vs. Head: U Chicago on Rubenstein vs. HLS @ sticker

Graduate School Law School
21

<p>After your parental (EFC) and student contributions are taken into account, HLS expects you to take out $130,000 in loans over three years to cover the cost of attendance. If those three sources of funding are insufficient to cover the cost of attendance ($78,000 a year), then HLS will award grant funding. Of note, students must usually take out full loans in order to be eligible for grant funding.</p>

<p>82% of HLS students receive some form of aid. Of these, 50% (41% of all students) receive some grants, while 50% receive no grants.</p>

<p>Grant aid covers, on average, 11% of the cost of attendance.</p>

<p>[Award</a> Packages](<a href=“http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/policy/packaging.html]Award”>http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/policy/packaging.html)
[Student</a> Budget](<a href=“http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/basics/cost/budget.html]Student”>http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/basics/cost/budget.html)</p>

22

<p>I believe that need-based aid at HLS covers up to half of tuition.</p>

<p>If your child were choosing between YLS and Ruby, the choice would be far easier to make.</p>

<p>On the one hand, an HLS degree opens up more doors, both within and beyond legal practice (remember that the vast majority of folks burn out of biglaw). On the other hand, graduating in the bottom of one’s class at HLS puts one in a dangerous situation (though one can still use one’s pedigree to obtain some sort of employment).</p>

<p>–</p>

<p>What’s your child’s take on the situation, since this is his/her future that we’re discussing?</p>

23

<p>

</p>

<p>To agree with kwu: Need-based aid, including loans, will cover up to all of the cost of attendance. Need-based grants will meet remaining cost of attendance if EFC, student contribution, and $42,000 a year in loans are inadequate. In theory, one could obtain as much as $36,000 a year in grant aid (46% of COA) if parents and student are deemed to be unable to contribute anything.</p>

<p>Note that my previous suggestion – that work can bring in money – will cut down grant support first, and only then reduce loans.</p>

24

<p>

</p>

<p>Yeah but that’s misleading. In context: “Although HLS grant funding can be generous for students with high financial need, the school’s annual grant budget covers only about 11% of the entire cost of attendance for the J.D. student population”</p>

<p>11% of the CoA for the entire JD population is not even close to the same as 11% of the CoA for a given grant recipient. About half of HLS are paying sticker and aren’t taking any of that grant money. </p>

<p>Thanks for the info though, I didn’t know that $130,000 was specified as the amount to borrow. But I do think that’s significant - $130,000 in loans vs $234,000 (78,000x3) is like a $100,000 scholarship. Furthermore, and more importantly, $130k@HLS vs Chicago is an entirely different story than $230,000@HLS vs Chicago.</p>

25

<p>

</p>

<p>IF expected parental and student contribution is determined by the financial aid office to be ZERO, yes.</p>

26

<p>Of note, if I’m going to keep using Harvard’s COA ($78,000) instead of tuition, then I should be using Chicago’s COA as well ($75,500), and note that the OP’s scholarship covers $60,000 of that.</p>

<p>[Costs</a> & Budget | University of Chicago Law School](<a href=“http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospectives/financialaid/budget]Costs”>Cost of Attendance | University of Chicago Law School)</p>

27

<p>I’m not saying OP’s gonna nab 100k from HLS. Hell a half tuition scholarship at lots of places is less than 100k (b/c of CoL). I’m saying that he will probably get somewhere between 0 and 100k. Where he lands in that range will (should) affect his decision. I don’t even know why this has turned into an argument.</p>

28

<p>U Chicago is an excellent well regarded law school nationally. Unless your son is committed to living / working in the Boston area, I could never advise turning down a full ride to Chicago. The burden of loans lives on long after the glow of a JD from Harvard recedes.</p>

29

<p>Prozack, I don’t necessarily disagree with your conclusion, but the glow of the Harvard JD never recedes. It probably ought to, but it doesn’t.</p>

30

<p>My first reaction to all the posts was “where is the like button?” Instead, thanks to all.</p>

<p>“Aid” can sound like free money, but at the risk of stating the obvious, need-based aid combines loans + grants. HLS states that they start everyone with a base loan of $42K/yr and fill in the remaining $36K with loans+grants, depending on family situation. Based on examples given at this link ([Should</a> I Apply for Grant Aid?](<a href=“http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/myaid/apply/applytype.html]Should”>http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/sfs/myaid/apply/applytype.html)), S will end up with mostly loans and very little grant money, resulting in total loans of >$150K. The program by design ensures that “Middle class” families with 2 incomes and frugal saving habits will end up with little grant money. And since the loans will be unsubsidized, the actual cost will be much higher.</p>

<p>kwu, S’s take so far is that “I will research it, including visits; we have time; but it is my life, my loans, my decision etc.” I respect that, but want S (who is 23) to make a rational decision. But as Hanna said, the glow, the glow…</p>

<p>kwu, why would the choice be far easier between YLS and Ruby? (YLS still pending)</p>

<p>I do like making $30K/summer (assuming you get a position) as a goal, if one were to go the HLS/loans route. Tutoring during a semester, not so sure about the load.</p>

31

<p>That information is useful. Your son would have to take out ~45k in loans for cost of living, but that’s a far cry from the non-discounted cost of some 270k for HLS. LIPP is your best bet of reasonably attending HLS. I can see myself eating the loans to attend HLS but I am also gunning for biglaw, and barring that you’ll have to look in-depth into HLS’s repayment plan. Chicago does seem like the better option for the risk and debt averse.</p>

32

<p>In my view, there are two situations where one should clearly take Chicago: biglaw and certain types of public interest work that do not pay attention to pedigree (e.g. public defense). I include Biglaw here because Chicago is still placing very well into Biglaw, and so there’s no sense giving up something like $200K to attend Harvard.</p>

<p>There are also some situations where one should clearly take Harvard. These include federal clerkships (which are admittedly not a career), federal legal work and especially White House work, legal academia, and those types of public interest law which are prestige-heavy (e.g. international human rights). Harvard is also the clear choice if the OP’s son is not planning to practice law at all (Governor Romney and the President are both Harvard JDs).</p>

<p>The issue here is that I don’t think the OP’s son knows which he wants to do, or that he might be in one of the in-between categories (e.g. public interest which pays some attention to pedigree).</p>

33

<p>It’s irrelevant to the OP, but worth pointing out: Chicago places decently into biglaw, but HLS will allow you some more long-term flexibility in private law, if not biglaw. Plus firms tend to dig deeper into HYS’s classes. Plus, all other things equal, the tippy top of the V50 will probably give an edge to HLS over Chicago.</p>

<p>With that said I think a lot, if not most, of HLS students (and I’m sure at Chicago as well) who end up doing the biglaw stint wanted a clerkship/academic gig/BigGov/ACLU-esque PI/etc. and didn’t get it. I’m more than happy to end up in biglaw, but who doesn’t want a clerkship, or an academic position, or work in the white house? Those are dream jobs, but are still a longshot at anywhere but Yale. I think if you want biglaw but also want a shot at something more prestigious (which I honestly think is the majority of people) HLS will win over Chicago.</p>

<p>But, with regards to the OP: the issue with taking HLS to get one of those more prestigious positons is that OP’s son wouldn’t be comfortable in biglaw. Even if HLS gives him better options, it does in a way force him to take biglaw if he can’t land a job doing something else. This is because even if lower-end PI jobs are available, he should’ve just gone to Chicago in the first place and avoided loans.</p>

34

<p>

</p>

<p>fwiw: in our state, a politician is much better off having a degree from the public flagship. :D</p>

35

<p>Also, Romney got a JD/MBA and went into consulting, and Obama not only practiced law he did BigLaw at Sidley (where Michelle Obama also worked).</p>

36

<p>I’d been under the impression that the President only ever summered with Sidley. But I looked it up, and you’re right that he practiced law for a bit, roughly three years:

<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

37

<p>I thought he worked there longer than just an SA. Thanks for finding my error! </p>

<p>More on topic, I highly advise against going to Harvard with some dream of later becoming a politician. It’s not an accident that Obama didn’t pay off his student debt (lower than yours will be!) until he made President.</p>

38

<p>A friend sent us the following perspective. Thought it was worth sharing. Said friend is a practicing attorney in NYC, married to another attorney, with kids who went to law schools and are carrying debt.</p>

<p>"Wow - what a dilemma. I generally agree that students should do all they can to avoid debt - and I wonder what is going to happen in the future with all these kids in terrible debt (but then again, in the current/probable future political climate, and if it creates a crisis, they may all have their debts forgiven. With other repercussions for them and society, but that’s another issue.)</p>

<p>S will get as good an education at Chicago. At Harvard he (or you) are paying for the experience, and the top .0001 percentile population that he will meet and have as his “community” for the future.</p>

<p>Although I believe S would have an amazing experience at Chicago, with having made Harvard, I think he could always regret not going there. Which is probably his argument to you and your SO.</p>

<p>It’s a compelling argument. Here are some other thoughts:</p>

<p>What would be more consistent with S’s interest in public interest law? Going to Harvard, a somewhat rarefied, completely divorced from reality environment, surrounded by other similarly brilliant but impractical young people who got and passed on scholarships to the other great law schools, and graduating terribly in debt (to give him more in common with the “public” he wants to help, and can then struggle with)? This could even sound romantic to S. But he’s never had to worry about his own bills or supporting a family. (And of course, an irony is that the people he wants to assist are simply aspiring to a middle class life themselves.)</p>

<p>Or going to Chicago, exposed to a more realistic mix of students and well-rounded environment, and after graduation being able to focus - with a clear debt-free mind - on his work and passion?</p>

<p>This is what I would do if I was S: Go to Chicago his first year, do some cool public interest work if he has any time (many more opportunities for that in Chicago than Boston), and then, if he still wants to, transfer to Harvard his second year. Getting in is not guaranteed, but transferring to a law school is generally much easier with good grades than getting in the first time. He would - I believe - only be more interesting to Harvard after his first year of law school. Doing this would give him a much richer experience - he’d get the benefits of both Chicago and Harvard, and avoid a year of tuition debt. And he will have made an “informed” decision.</p>

<p>If S is concerned about work, the only job I know of that is biased toward Harvard and Yale - the only one - is Supreme Court Justice. However, some Justices have attended other law schools (like Stanford). Otherwise, I cannot imagine anyone favoring a Harvard grad over a Chicago grad for any job, and I have done a lot of recruiting."</p>

39

<p>I would choose Chicago in a heartbeat.</p>

40

<p>It seems incredible to me to give up a full ride (plus!) to a tippy top law school in order to pay full freight at another top law school, where the differences in opportunities, name recognition, and “brand” over the course of a career are marginal, at best. My advice to my own children would be that the clear choice is Chicago under these circumstances. </p>

<p>I don’t think that one can continue to count on any LRAP, loan forgiveness, etc. programs. As budgets are stretched and priorities change over time, so may these programs.</p>

<p>That said, my opinion is certainly tempered by living an adult life that began by treading water in a very deep pool of student loans. Treading that water can be awfully exhausting.</p>