<p>You should know that law school at UC is now very expensive, with an annual tuition of ~$20K. If your son is truly interested in politics, then he should NOT aim for the big-bucks law firm jobs on graduation -- instead he should be headed for the public sector, working in the DA's office or for a public agency. So he's looking at a starting salary of about ~$45K in today's dollars, maybe less if he goes for opportunity rather than pay and chooses some sort of stipend or internship. </p>
<p>But I'm not voting. The choice is your son's and no one else's, especially since you have laid it out to him with a precise dollar figure you are willing to contribute. Just make sure he knows what law school will cost.</p>
<p>I graduated from college and started law school at age 20, by the way. Here's the funny thing -- at the time I thought I must have been one of the youngest students at law school, so I kept my mouth shut about my age and tried to act mature. ;) Twenty years later, when my law school classmates started getting various honors -- appointed to judgeships and public positions -- and I was reading their bios..... they were all the same age as me. Either there are some who were hedging a little about their age, or else my class was full of 20 year olds posing as being the ripe old age of 22 - who were all happy to revert back to their previous ages once they approached 40.</p>
<p>FWIW, I'm a UC grad - 2 campuses -- and my daughter is looking seriously at U. of Chicago. (But she won't go there unless need-based financial aid matches the cost of an in-state education) I absolutely loved Berkeley, but was not there for undergrad -- my brother was an undergrad at Berkeley and essentially flunked out (not quite, but he transferred to another campus and didn't finish). This was back in the 70's. Your son WILL find off campus housing that is cheaper than the dorm housing, in part because the dorms at Berkeley are so high -- in fact, if he goes he may prefer to start with the off-campus co-ops to save some money. The dorms there aren't really on-campus in any event, with the nicest dorms being quite a distance from the main campus. One factor as to cost, though, is that the dorms include meals, whereas the rent paid for private housing usually doesn't -- so overall cost off campus depends on eating habits. Monthly rent off campus for a single room in a shared apartment or house is probably about $600 - but you'd probably have to figure in at least another $200 for food. Then again, Berkeley has so many places to eat and snack near campus, that kids living in dorms might end up spending almost the same amount at the off-campus eateries -- pizza is a lot more attractive to most youngsters than standard dorm fare. At least kids living in apartments have their own cooking facilities.</p>
<p>Thank you all for your comments and votes. I'm feeling a little bit Evil-Robotesque and having a strange sense of deja-vu from last year when ER had the dilemma with Yale and Vandy. I came down on the side of him going to Yale to live out the dream rather than the practicality of going to Vandy and not being in debt. Now that I'm the one faced with going into debt, it's tougher. (funny how that works!) </p>
<p>The difference between ER's situation and my S's is that Chicago was never the dream school (Harvard was, and he was waitlisted). Chicago is just Mom's perfect-fit-for-son school. </p>
<p>The financial bottom line is that if S goes to Cal, he can feasibly come out after three years with $74,000 of promised money (from us) to spend on grad school. (I asked him tonight at dinner if he was 100 percent sure that he wants to go to grad or law school and he said yes.) If he goes to Chicago for four years, he will come out $39,000 in debt and have no money for grad school, so he would have to borrow upwards of $100,000 on top of the undergrad debt. (There is no way we can do that for him, not with another kid to educate and not on our salaries.)</p>
<p>He wants to go into public service or public service law. I can't ever see him in corporate law. He cares not a wit about making a lot of money but a great deal about making society a more just place. He has a deep streak of idealism, one that both his dad and I carry (we are in public service, too), and I think that it will prevent him from ever being truly rich, which is okay with us, but creates limitations.</p>
<p>By coincidence, I was listening a few days ago to a discussion of why UMASS should have its own law school. The argument was that despite what seems a plethora of lawyers, there is a dearth of lawyers willing to be appointed by the court to represent indigent clients. MA apparently has a very low rate of reimbursement. The point the person was making was that lawyers come out of law schools such as Harvard or BC with such high debt that they just cannot afford to work as court-appointed lawyers. So MA needs a law school that is more affordable so that people who want to go into public service law can do so and still pay off their debts. Unfortunately, this argument did not persuade the MA legislature. </p>
<p>Boalt Hall at $20K is half what it costs to be an undergrad at U of C, and far less than it would cost at Harvard Law School. And there is little in the way of financial aid for law school.</p>
<p>I would send S to prefrosh weekends, and let him get a feel for what future classmates would be like. Also, he could talk to profs in his field. He truly needs more info
By the way, I'm a believer in mother's intuition.</p>
<p>I have to vote for Berkeley. Top Berkeley students place extremely well and he will soon be in upper division. Berkeley will offer superb California connections. If there were no money differential, that would be another thing, but with the $$$ situation it is a no-brainer to me. Esp becuase of the major. It just isn't one that stands out for me as a Chicago strength? Also the lower expected gps's from Chicago could hurt for law school where it really counts more than any other grad school.</p>
<p>But do your research. I'm sure you could find info on law school acceptance rates.</p>
<p>momof2inca: To answer your question--H was at Cal during Vietnam, so yes, late 60s, early 70s. His campus tour is not like any other I've ever taken: "Well, the police were lined up along here, I was walking across here trying to get to class, when suddenly...." </p>
<p>Another story, to underline the point about making sure you're known to your profs: H took a year break during law school to take an master's at the London School of Economics. They required letters of recommendation from his undergrad college. He contacted two profs at Berkeley. One wrote a nice rec; the other wrote LSE that he had no recollection of my H--had never had him as a student as far as he knew. Fortunately LSE didn't care and admitted DH. So, if your son ends up at Cal, you might want to pass on this cautionary tale.</p>
<p>UCB - although my ballot has a hanging chad and shouldn't be counted. Hopefully he will get that "feeling" when he visits UCB (you did mention he'd already visited UofC?). Perhaps not the "dream" feeling, but an "I could happily live and work here for 3-4 years" feeling. How does he feel about spectator sports and the college frenzy that goes with? UCB has that (even with some bad teams). Last year we watched their ultimate frisbee team in the national championship match.</p>
<p>My S is in law school, carrying some grad debt. I'm thankful that we were able to swing his undergrad without loans cuz he probably will go into some type of public service with his JD. He loves his work with judges and in the courts (assists clerks and DA's). Who knows where his JD might take him, but at least he won't have the pressure of chasing after a position he really doesn't like because he needs more $$.</p>
<p>"Chicago is just Mom's perfect-fit-for-son school."</p>
<p>calmom -- "If your son is truly interested in politics, then he should NOT aim for the big-bucks law firm jobs on graduation -- instead he should be headed for the public sector, working in the DA's office or for a public agency."</p>
<p>Yes, this is exactly what he would do. And we are well aware of the startings salaries of such careers. sigh.</p>
<p>"Twenty years later, when my law school classmates started getting various honors -- appointed to judgeships and public positions -- and I was reading their bios..... they were all the same age as me. Either there are some who were hedging a little about their age, or else my class was full of 20 year olds posing as being the ripe old age of 22 - who were all happy to revert back to their previous ages once they approached 40."</p>
<p>LOL! That's a great story. Are you still practicing? If so, what kind of law?</p>
<p>Marite: "The point the person was making was that lawyers come out of law schools such as Harvard or BC with such high debt that they just cannot afford to work as court-appointed lawyers. So MA needs a law school that is more affordable so that people who want to go into public service law can do so and still pay off their debts."</p>
<p>Yes, exactly so. If S had a hankering for corporate law, I would be more inclined to lean toward heavy debt for law school. Those attorneys make a ton of money. But if I know one thing about him, it's that he will never be a corporate attny or develop an interest in business. Paying back a boat load of law school loans would take him forever, and how would he do that and still live in a high-cost state such as California?</p>
<p>bookworm: he's going to Cal for an overnight in a couple of weeks. Already been to Chicago in the fall.</p>
<p>bettina, yup, I need to look into law/grad school acceptances for both schools. Thanks for your vote.</p>
<p>Janesmith, as a UCSB grad, I know exactly how your H felt with trying to get letters of rec. I have already talked to S about how he would need to be more assertive at Cal in order to get to know his profs, whereas at Chicago, he would stand out from day one by virtue of the smaller classes and overall enrollment.</p>
<p>Maize, S is not into sports or Greek life, of which there is plenty at Cal. But I think it's maybe a big enough and diverse enough place that those aspects wouldn't be overwhelming. There is a lot of activism and politics on campus, too. I don't know. </p>
<p>Long ago, I graduated from one of those NE "elite" schools with mostly small classes and a couple years later ended up taking a few (extremely large) undergraduate courses at UC Berkeley. While some of my classes at Elite U were memorable, one huge lecture class at Berkeley was equally memorable and inspiring because the Nobel Laureate teaching the class was a brilliant educator and scientist. </p>
<p>I'm guessing there are mediocre, good, and great teachers at both UC Berkeley and U of Chicago. Intellectual fruits probably hang from the trees at both places although the environment of the orchard and the efforts the student must make to partake may differ. </p>
<p>I've also heard that many UC Berkeley students don't avail themselves of the profs' office hours - so making use of those is an easy way to become less anonymous. </p>
<p>I'm voting for Berkeley if your son really doesn't have a preference and he's willing to take some initiative - he's going to need that for law school or politics, anyway.</p>
<p>Since you've asked us to vote, I'd have to go with UCB. These are two very fine schools - and if your son is assertive, he should be able to get almost as much out of UCB as he would out of Chicago. As much? Hard to say. I often wonder if the Nobel prize winners at Chicago have much contact with undergraduate students -- especially as there are more graduate students than undergrads at Chicago. Berkeley is tops in the country in so many departments. How much difference could there be? Not $100,000 worth.
As for going to an in-state school so your son can enter politics in his home state -- that sounds silly really. Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr and Sr, John Kerry -- none of these guys went to state schools. The key is to go to Yale law school! I suppose John Edwards went to UNC-CH, but this does not seem to have endeared him to his home state voters. Also, this theory assumes that your son wants to go into politics in California. There are 49 other states, you know.
Anyho -- Berkeley it is. If money were no object, I'd say go wherever you want. But I would not want to be a kid coming out of school with $40K in debt with the intent of going into public service - which does not exactly pay the big bucks. That's too much to ask.</p>
<p>By the way, Hastings -- a lesser known UC law school in San Francisco -- produces a lot of grads in public interest law. Also, I think UCB has programs both in Sacramento and in DC.</p>
<p>Last year, we gave our son these instructions: The decision is up to you but, if you go private we will only pay for four years and you are on your own for grad school. If you think you'd like to take longer so you can explore more fields, go to a UC. If you think you'd like to go to medical or law school afterwards, go to a UC. If you think you'd like to take a whole year abroad, go to a UC. He chose the private option...but we would have been delighted if he had chosen the UC.</p>
<p>It's great that you're offering your son his choice, even though you might have to go into debt. But if, given the parameters you set out, he decides on Berkeley, I hope you'll celebrate and not feel disappointed. I'll just tell one more story: while on a year abroad at the University of Sussex, I had a one on one tutorial with a professor and I popped my head in one day to ask him if I could have another half hour to finish my essay. The student who happened to be meeting with him at the time was a friend who later told me he couldn't believe my nerve. He also couldn't believe the professor's reaction. After I closed the door, the prof turned to this student and said: "that was Miss....She goes to BERKELEY" as if it were the most exalted institution on earth. It has tremendous name recognition all around the globe. (I came back, by the way, and took a two semester honors seminar in political science. It met in a professor's house.)</p>
<p>I know many top notch students at Berkeley right now. I know some top notch high school students that will be there next year. Southern California is very different than Northern California so your son will experience that.</p>
<p>He will get to know his professors. </p>
<p>Add another vote for Berkeley, a great college town.</p>
<p>topcat0214: Just a little correction here. John Edwards, though from NC, first went to Clemson (in SC), and had to drop out, because his parents could no longer afford the out of state tuition. He then went to North Carolina State in Raleigh (not UNC) as an undergraduate, and UNC for law school. And I will have to say, though he did not (sadly) carry NC in the election, that public school education served him well in his ability to connect with people, in his career as a lawyer and senator, and in his current position at the UNC Poverty Center. And though I was a huge Kerry/Edwards supporter, I do believe that Kerry's Ivy education (among other things) greatly distanced him from a lot of voters. I don't think it's right, but it's true. And maybe not in all states, but definitely in southern states...if one has any interest in going into politics and public service (and, yes, that usually starts at the local level), attending a public university as an undergraduate (at the least) can only serve one well, not only in how people 'connect' with you, but in those connections one makes.</p>
<p>Momof2
I would strongly encourage my own <em>inca</em> to go to Berkeley over Chicago. As you know, we are also considering Chicago, without the $. I also asked my D, and she read your entire thread, and said, "I don't see why there is a discussion about this, I would choose B over C without a second thought."</p>
<p>Unfortunately our State Uni. does not come close to Berkeley. I will start a thread on that soon, and then you can advise me:)</p>
<p>Momof2inca ... law was my first career, I'm on my second. I practiced law a little less than 20 years; but it didn't mix all that well with child-rearing -& so I opted for something that would be low stress & allow me more flexibility. But one thing I found when shifting careers is that my law degree and experience was tremendously valuable for any sort of business. So I still think a law degree is a great foundation for just about anything ... except for the fact that I went through school paying less than $750 tuition per year, and my kids will not have that opportunity, so I doubt that either of them will head off to law school. The problem as you know is you can not get rich doing public service/public interest type work, and quite frankly when I had to move away from that sort of stuff to pay the bills, I kind of lost interest. I would guess that there are grants available for law students committed to public interest work, but I don't know specifics.</p>
<p>Marite - TUITION at Boalt for in-staters is about $20K a year - that does NOT include housing. Tuition for in-staters for undergrad still under $6K/year. I have no idea what Boalt charges out-of-staters... no way in the world will my kid give up the benefit of their California residence status.</p>
<p>wow momof2inca, I can relate to the "final two" dilemma so well, having just lived through it!
With our S, we tried very hard not to weigh in, but he was keenly aware of the huge financial gulf between Tulane (even with a scholarship) and University of Florida. He liked them both and felt he could be happy at either.
We had him re-visit both places and then turned the decision over to him.
He chose UF.</p>
<p>That's why I just cannot vote. Your SON'S vote is the important one! </p>
<p>I know I am comparing apples to oranges here with our two cases, but there are common elements between the two situations. Sounds like your S has two excellent choices and could be successful at either school. Best of luck!!!</p>
<p>Like others have posted, I wouldn't bet a lot of $$ on S getting through Berkeley in 3 years. But even factoring that in, I'd vote Berkeley as well.</p>
<p>Most Californians come from someplace else; there's little evidence that we're afraid to vote for politicians who studied out-of-state.</p>
<p>Take a look at our last six governors:</p>
<p>Arnold the "Governator" studied at the University of Wisconsin (Superior).
Grey Davis studied at Stanford, then Columbia Law.
Pete Wilson went to Yale, then Boalt Hall for law school.
George Deukmajian went to Sienna College, then St. Johns for law school, both in New York.
Jerry Brown went to Berkeley, then Yale Law School.
Ronald Reagan went to Eureka College in Iowa.</p>
<p>Look at our current Senators: one went to Stanford (Feinstein), and one to Brooklyn College (Boxer).</p>
<p>I'd also wager that fewer than one percent of the high school seniors who are interested in politics ultimately run for office at any level.</p>