My son has been admitted to both Michigan and Duke law schools (also Vanderbilt, UCLA, Wash U in St. Louis, and in-state schools but leaning towards a T14 school). Any thoughts on Michigan versus Duke? Thanks.
whichever one is cheapest.
Thanks @bluebayou. I take it from your comment that you believe they are about equal (they are tied at #10 in USNWR). We are not that concerned about the money and don’t have all that information yet. He could go in state (Arizona) for full scholarship and got almost full scholarship at Wash U. Don’t know about others yet. But really just mean to inquire about the schools without taking into account cost at this point (which we may consider later).
Only attend 'Zona if he wants to live and practice there permanently.
Yes, the other two are pretty similar in academics so pick between the two on personal preference. Ann Arbor is a much better college town than Durham, but then Duke is a much smaller school, which would hopefully give your S more attention. Mich is probably stronger in PI/Govt work, should he be interested in that. Duke has more reach in the south, while Mich may? have a little better reach into AZ (should he want to return). From either school, however, assume he’ll end up in NYC where the mass of jobs are.
But, unless you are really wealthy, retake the LSAT for a better deal next year. Merit money is tax free, and is the easiest money that he will ever “earn.”
For 95% of the population, it is foolish to pay sticker at anything other than HYS, and even those three are getting mighty expensive.
I went to Michigan Law and cannot speak for Duke, but many UML grads end up in DC, NYC, Chicago, SF, LA and scattered about. Three of my classmates ended up in Arizona. There is really no place in Michigan to go, aside from Detroit, so people leave. That said, I have taken advantage of the huge Michigan alumni network (not just lawyers), which continues to open doors and is great for networking and fun, especially during football season. My advice is to have him visit both schools to see where he feels more comfortable. The other schools are fine too but just not as highly ranked, which, in this elitist profession, unfortunately, does matter.
Faced the same choice but many many years ago. I sat down with a next door neighbor who was a Harvard Law Professor, and he flat-out told me that Michigan was the better place to go. I ignored his advice and went to Duke. I think he was looking at it from the academy’s viewpoint, which is the one he knows–Michigan has more well-known faculty, produces more Federal Court and Supreme Court clerks, and I believe that in most cases, a young law professor who had two offers–one from Michigan and one from Duke, would probably take Michigan.
I had my reasons for choosing Duke, I liked the smaller class sizes (which I thought would give me better contact with the faculty), Duke has a first year writing seminar taught by a faculty member (unlike other schools where the writing is taught by adjuncts), and I thought the private school name of Duke would be better career-wise. Some of these reasons panned out, some didn’t. Michigan felt big, and, at the time, the gulf between in-state applicants and out-ofstaters seemed wide.
In recent years, Duke has been strong; Dean Levi is a force in the legal field, and he has brought more attention to the school, and the Supreme Court has seemed to hire more clerks from Duke than in my years. They’ve also upgraded the school building significantly; it used to seem like a circa1970s elementary school but now it’s very nice and modern with a lot more social and meeting space than before. The faculty seems top-flight and they’ve closed the gap on Michigan to some extent.
I think you should take into account where you might want to work after law school. Duke has a pretty good pipeline into DC and the South (Atlanta, Florida, Texas), while Michigan is strong in Chicago and the Midwest. New York City is probably a wash, with maybe a slight lean to Michigan. Out in the west, neither has much of an edge.
Also consider: basketball or football?
Thanks everyone for your thoughtful responses. One thing I didn’t mention is that I went to Michigan undergrad and my son has always been somewhat of a Wolverine fan, and his brother is currently a freshman there. So there is a Michigan connection, but he really wants to decide (or at least have information on) the merits of the two schools. Michigan housing seems much easier, about half of first years live right in the Law Quad and there is new graduate housing very close as well as countless apartments close by for the second and third years. The Duke site says that most law students have apartments and have a 5 to 10 minute drive to school, which seems much more complicated, possibly requiring a car. Still, he has always been interested in Duke. He will be visiting both schools for admitted students week-end next month and that will help. If anyone else has any insights, that would be helpful.
duke undergrad alum parent here. son used to study in the renovated Law School due to the beauty of the premises and the total overhaul of the property of the law school. I will say this: car required. Duke/Durham/Chapel Hill are fairly easy to cover by car but safety from crime is an issue in Durham. Durham is in the Triangle which holds employment for many PhDs. Also in the south, running up and down the expressways to major cities in the SE corridor is pretty common. He should get a good grasp of where law students tend to rent housing and have a gander at a couple of those properties. Obviously the weather in Durham is stellar…and Duke Alum networking is outstanding and nationwide. Pretty sure everyone would agree that Ann Arbor has superior college town experience although many grad school Dukies and faculty members do reside in Chapel Hill.
Go to WashU to save money and then transfer after 1 year. If money really isn’t an issue (as in, he comes from a wealthy family), then everyone else has raised good points. Otherwise, not considering the money aspect is a bit crazy considering the costs.
If money is an issue, take either the in-state tuition at Arizona or the money at Wash U.
Have you son figure out what he wants to do and where he wants to live. Then check the attorney profiles at various firms in those areas that do that type of work. If he checks out ten firms in Arizona and cannot find a single Michigan alum, but a few Duke alums, that should tip his decision.
He can and should approach both schools about scholarships. One of the schools may be willing to throw money at him.
Don’t make the decision based on campus housing. This isn’t undergrad. Curriculum, job placement, and alumni networking should rule the day.
On the other hand, I would not have gone to law school had I not gotten into a top school, and thus did not apply to any outside of the top ten back in the late 80s. Your boy has many options, including parental financial support, which gives him far more options. Thus, ASU should be seriously considered.
BUT, he doesn’t want to be in a situation years from now telling everyone that he got into an elite school but forewent the opportunity.
.
Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to respond. My son has received some scholarship money (not a lot) from Michigan and doesn’t know about Duke scholarship yet. Still could get some need aid from Michigan but probably not (Michigan does NOT take into account parents’ funds in need based aid, which surprised us.) But we are fortunate enough not to be concerned with the cost and we value education and are willing to pay for it, so we are more interested in other criteria; we can decide based on cost later. Anyway, both my husband and I are lawyers and both worked on Wall Street for many years. I went to a school that is rated in the low 30s now (don’t know what it was then), but was second in my class and had many Wall Street offers. My view is that if you are at the very top of the class at most schools you will have many opportunities, if you go to Michigan or Duke you will have many opportunities if you are in the top third or maybe even lower. So your chances are just better because there is no guarantee you will be at the very top of class. Also, what my law school lacked was a grapevine; I got my offers by writing letters since few NY firms recruited at the school, and probably would have picked a better fit if my school had had a better “grapevine” about opportunities. I feel that the lack of a grapevine was significant. I have also be a partner with recruiting duties at a national firm and know that some places like Arizona may not have many Michigan or Duke alumni but that is more because few apply from those schools. Firms would love to have applicants from an T14 - and other top 20- schools. They seek a variety of good schools for their associates. But still, applicants have to at least be in top half at very good school, or top of class at a lower ranked school. I am partly writing this particular post because it might be helpful to others reading this. I had initially just wondered how people would compare Duke and Michigan and wondered what their relative reputations might be (considered equally ranked by USNWR). My son will get a feeling after visiting both schools next month. Thanks.
^^Duke cares a lot about yield and hates to lose candidates to other comparable schools and they hate to lose quality candidates for $$. If he really likes Duke, he should ask them to match the offer: I really like the opportuntities here (blah, blah, blah), but Mich would be considerably cheaper (hint, hint)…
Good luck.
btw: don’t forget that your success from a lower ranked school is that of a female (which gets a small boost, at least initially).
We can’t compare the employment climate from 30 years ago to the present because there’s a severe glut of lawyers at present.
My son-in-law who is a senior associate at a NYC law firm said just because you are a good law student doesn’t mean you make a good lawyer. Attrition is high even at the top firms.
I would like to ignore the sexist comment but will mention that when I was a summer associate, a partner took me to lunch and drew my brain on a napkin explaining to me why I would be less likely to succeed as a lawyer than a man because of the structure of my brain. I have also been to firms where interviewers were cautioned that females might interview well because they were better conversationalists but the interviewer should beware, take that into account, and not over evaluate females. I never made anything of begin female, just always tried my best, but I could tell you many many stories. You are wrong if you thing being at the top of your class and a “lesser” school will not get you jobs if you are male. My current firm (or former firms) hired many people using that criteria. I know the job market it very hard now, but I have been involved with recruiting for years and being at the very top of your class is still marketable. Perhaps not at a school that is extremely low in the rankings but certainly at many schools that are not in top 20. And with good reason. Getting into a top school mostly means you did well on LSAT and got good grades. But being at the top of your class is a more important hurdle. When I have worked with a large number of new associates the Harvard grads, for example, rarely stood out.
As for attrition being high at the top firms, that has always been the case on Wall Street. The structure is to get a few good years out of an associate but make very few partners. That is the business model.
don’t take offense or make up something that doesn’t exist.
Never thought that.
The fact is that diversity is highly needed in the legal profession, and law school acceptances and firm recruiting during OCI bear that out.
Sexist? Untrue? Stupid? Survey says yes.
@2135, from my experience (both on the interviewee side and interviewer side), having a “smart” stamp is what employers are looking for. Having a prestigious law school on a resume (indicating that someone was either smart or driven enough, or both, to get in), or good grades at a non-prestigious school, shows “smarts”. The more highly ranked the school, the worse your grades can be and you can still do fine in interviews.
I graduated almost first in my class in undergrad and middle of my class in law school, and I’d say that making it through law school, which was full of overachievers, was a prouder moment for me.
I was talking to one of my classmates (from Harvard) and we were discussing who graduated absolutely last in our class. We think that we know who that is, and while he couldn’t have gotten an offer at Cravath or Wachtell, he started off at a certainly reputable firm (paying the market rate for NYC) and has worked at a few other places, all top-tier.
Back to Duke vs. Michigan, I looked at my former firms’ websites to see which school had more alumni at them. Duke and Michigan seemed about equal in NYC, with Duke having slightly more at my former employers. (Other firms could have more Michigan people.) I’d say that both schools are equal, although I would prefer a larger law school, but that’s just my personal preference.
@HappyAlumnus, thank you for your thoughtful response and taking the time to look at your former firms’ websites.
Back in the day, my torts professor told our class that we would all get good jobs. What turned out to be true then no longer holds, at least in today’s saturated market. I was in the bottom half of my class and still got interviews with Cravath, ending up at a national BigLaw. One attorney interviewer told me he’d rather take a student in the bottom half from a top school like Harvard, Columbia or Michigan than risk going with a top student at a second tier school. I don’t necessarily agree but I do sympathize with those who end up in the lower half of second tier schools, especially today. And I agree it’s much harder to make it to the top of the class anywhere. On the other hand, at least at Michigan, many who made law review, etc. had parents who were lawyers and thus were at a huge advantage vis a vis the rest of us. They already knew the legal language and vocabulary, what a holding was, what an appellant, respondent, etc., was, while the rest of us were glued to our law dictionaries. Your son will likely succeed in law school, based on his pedigree and legal training, however indirect, at home. I recall asking a top student in my evidence class how he knew how to object so well and he said, paraphrasing, “you’d know how to object too if you had two parents who were lawyers arguing all the time at the dinner table.” Regarding Duke and Michigan, I know the law dorm or Quad a Michigan makes the transition into law school very easy, especially the dining hall, which acts as another peace to meet new friends, debate and otherwise assimilate into the environment. The place, as you already know, is self contained, which I found very convenient, especially when waking up late and running to class. And you don’t need a car.
Bottom line: your boy will more likely than not be top of his class wherever he goes so choose either Michigan or Duke and he just might clerk for SCOTUS, or at least a USCA.