Berkeley v. Columbia v. Chicago

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>I finally have all the information I need to make a decision and want to hear what some of you would do.</p>

<p>I will most likely go into private practice; however, I would like to study critical race theory and other similar policy/social justice courses while a law student. I am from the Bay Area, go to school in Southern California and REALLY want to get out of California for law school! I eventually want to practice in California though.</p>

<p>Berkeley ($100,000 over three years)
+Great curriculum with variety in social justice, critical race theory and policy courses
+Great journals, clinics and student organizations
+Amazingly humble, friendly and passionate students
+Great weather!
+I’m from the Bay Area so close to family/friends
+Wasn’t wowed by the ASD, but the students there really persuaded me that I could be really happy at Berkeley</p>

<p>-I’m from the Bay Area and I think three years is a great time to get out and explore another part of the country! I don’t want to regret not living somewhere else during law school.
-They don’t have the star faculty that the other two schools have</p>

<p>Columbia ($147,000)
+Great curriculum with variety in social justice, critical race theory and policy courses (What better place to study these issues when they have Kimberle Crenshaw, Patricia Williams, Ted Shaw, Jack Greenberg, Katherine Franke, and Susan Sturm!)
+Great journals, clinics and student organizations
+Student body overall wasn’t as cool as Berkeley’s; however, the students of color that I hung out with were amazing and I feel a real sense of community and friendship with the students I was around when I visited
+Out of California!
+AMAZING ASD! I had a blast, liked Morningside Heights and was wowed.
+Star faculty</p>

<p>-EXPENSIVE!! Is going to my favorite school worth the difference?</p>

<p>Chicago ($135,000)
+Out of California
+Star faculty
+Small student body</p>

<p>-EXPENSIVE!!
-Don’t like the lack of variety in courses
-Not very much diversity in the student body
-Don’t get the sense that students are enjoying their time as much as at other schools–a lot more academic/intellectual, which is a great thing (maybe just not for me)
-Small number of journals and not interested in most of the clinics offered</p>

<p>I think for me, it’s really down to Columbia and Berkeley. I could be happy at both, but I want to go to Columbia more if it wasn’t for the money issue. The difference is ~$47,000, which goes down to ~$32,000 if I factor in earnings after 2L summer at a firm (it goes down because Columbia won’t change my grant, but Berkeley will change my financial aid if I make significant earnings at a firm).</p>

<p>So, is going to the school you like better worth $20,000-40,000 more over three years?</p>

2

<p>It’s hard in this economy, of course, but Columbia might also boost your chances at a 1L summer job as well. That can be a HUGE difference. Columbia also has superior loan repayment options if you don’t end up in corporate work.</p>

<p>I know it’s easy to say when it’s not my money, but honestly, man, take Columbia. It’s an objectively and subjectively (e.g., for what you want) better school.</p>

3

<p>

</p>

<p>that’s $47k price difference there. </p>

<p>well, columbia law isn’t worth $47k more than Berkeley law. </p>

<p>honestly speaking, except for its location, which is nyc, i cannot make a strong argument for columbia law as a better law school than Berkeley law is. </p>

<p>definitely go for berkeley law.</p>

4

<p>Did you not read his post? Or my discussion? His financial aid <em>and</em> 1L summer job prospects will both be different, and loan repayment options are different. That $47K erodes pretty rapidly when you consider these things. (Cost of living will bring it back up a little, but Berkeley is also pretty expensive. It’s not like we’re comparing to Charlottesville.)</p>

<p>I would argue strongly that Columbia is a better law school – faculty, opportunities, student caliber. Just as importantly, the OP has always been in California and the networking, experience, and knowledge of the country will be enhanced by crossing coasts. (I would tell somebody from Jersey to go to Stanford over Columbia, for example.)</p>

<p>I grew up in Berkeley; I very nearly attended CLS; my circle of closest friends includes 2 Boalt students, a CLS student, and a CLS alum; I visit both schools on a regular basis. I’m very familiar with both programs and would urge the OP to take Columbia.</p>

5

<p>Without considering summer earnings, the difference is $47k. If I get a firm job after 2L summer, that will go down to $32k. If I am one of the lucky few who get a 1L summer firm job, that will go down to $17k with savings.</p>

<p>Those numbers include COL differences.</p>

6

<p>Going to a law school you like can be worth more money. It’s partly a function of your own attitudes toward debt.</p>

<p>You say that you eventually want to return to California. Do you mean immediately after law school?</p>

<p>Both Columbia and Berkeley enjoy recruiting from law firms across the country. The difference is that all major New York firms recruit at Columbia, and all major California firms recruit at Berkeley. Not all major New York firms recruit at Berkeley, and not all major California firms recruit at Columbia. </p>

<p>If your grades are less than stellar in law school, and you’re looking beyond BigLaw for your first job, the next tier of firms is much more likely to recruit at law schools in relatively close proximity to the firm’s offices.</p>

<p>If you want to practice in New York for a while, and then move back to California, that would give an edge to Columbia.</p>

7

<p>Oh, wow, didn’t realize you’d already adjusted for COL.</p>

<p>The other thing to consider is: it’s easier to get a 1L job from Columbia than from Berkeley. If you’re considering the earnings difference as well as the financial aid difference, that can easily wipe out that last $17K.</p>

8

<p>How plausible is it to practice in New York for a couple of years and then return to California? Would that require passing both the New York and California state bars? Are there attorneys who do this? </p>

<p>I am open to practicing out of California for a period, but I would most likely want to come back to California.</p>

9

<p>It would require passing both the New York and California state bars.</p>

<p>There are attorneys who do that. Some attorneys actually like sitting for multiple bar exams. Likewise, there are people who enjoy having hot wax poured on them and being whipped with chains.</p>

10

<p>bluedevilmike,</p>

<p>I’d like to see you back up your assertions with some verifiable data.
I am aware Columbia has an excellent law school, but I don’t see it as more prestigious than Berkeley law. I also don’t see their grad as more preferred than Berkeley law grads at top law firms except those firms that are close to their respective locations.
I’ve also known many Columbia law admits who are at Berkeley law now.
I’m not saying Berkeley law is better than Columbia law. I just think they’re so close to each other that it’s hard to differentiate between the two in terms of prestige and opportunities after graduation.
They way I see this, you go to Columbia law if your aim to to get into a top law school in NY. You go to Berkeley law if you want to practice in the West Coast. But when they compete in areas outside of their respective locations, they’re neck-and-neck. it’s hard to tell, that’s why if you have data, please show them to us.</p>

11

<p>Thank you for your responses! I’ve enrolled at Columbia. I loved both schools, but I feel that Columbia has more to offer me and that it will be worth the difference in costs.</p>

12

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Okay, let’s play.</p>

<hr>

<p>

</p>

<p>1.) [240</a> vs. 215,](<a href=“http://leiterrankings.com/faculty/2008faculty_impact.shtml]240”>Brian LeiterTop Ten Law Faculties in Scholarly Impact, 2005-2008) admittedly a minor difference. Although, larger than the difference between Berkeley and Duke – so if Berkeley and Columbia are basically identical, is Duke?</p>

<p>2.) But that’s not really what we’re looking at, because the OP has told us he’s most interested in the crits. So, in his own words:

</p>

<p>3.) Faculty student ratio is [9.5</a> (CLS) vs. 12.3 (UCB)](<a href=“http://www.bcgsearch.com/pdf/BCG_Law_School_Guide_2009.pdf]9.5”>http://www.bcgsearch.com/pdf/BCG_Law_School_Guide_2009.pdf).</p>

<hr>

<p>

</p>

<p>1.) Hard to measure, because it’s unclear exactly which is the most prestigious sector. Fortunately, the OP has solved this dilemma for us:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Okay, so let’s check out the big law firms (the “NLJ 250”).</p>

<p>[CLS:</a> 74.8%, UCB 53.7%](<a href=“http://www.law.com/img/nlj/charts/20080414gotoschools.jpg]CLS:”>http://www.law.com/img/nlj/charts/20080414gotoschools.jpg)</p>

<p>(NB: The chart looks a little funny: Harvard and Yale rank fairly low. Adding a clerkship correction fixes this. With that correction from the BCG report, we get CLS 83.8%, UCB 65.7%.)</p>

<p>2.) Leiter uses another ranking. His rather complicated index has [CLS at #1 with 1.53, while Berkeley is at the bottom of the T14, with 0.59.](<a href=“Top 15 Law Schools From Which Elite U.S. Law Firms Hire New Lawyers”>http://leiterrankings.com/jobs/2008job_biglaw.shtml&lt;/a&gt;) </p>

<p>3.) Alternatively, you can look at the most selective measure of all: SCOTUS Clerkships.</p>

<p>CLS: 18, class size 400
UCB: 11, class size 309 (see NLJ chart for class size; Leiter is unreliable on this point)</p>

<p>22 CLS students per year per clerkship over nine years; 28 UCB students, for a [27%</a> difference](<a href=“http://leiterrankings.com/jobs/2000_08_scotus_clerks.shtml]27%”>Brian Leiter Supreme Court Clerkship Placement, 2000 Thourgh 2008 Terms). Astronomical? No. Noticeable? Probably.</p>

<hr>

<p>

</p>

<p>IQR LSAT, GPA (midpoints):
Berkeley: 163-170 (167), 3.64-3.9 (3.77)</p>

<p>Columbia: 169-174 (172), 3.56-3.81 (3.69).</p>

<p>So Berkeley wins on GPA, but CLS wins on LSAT. High GPAs are much, much more common among undergrads than high LSAT scores when we’re in this range; a much higher number of prelaw candidates are viable candidates at UCB than at CLS.</p>

<p>Of course, Berkeley has an idiosyncratic, GPA-heavy admissions process. So here’s a helpful way.</p>

<p>Ranked among the T14 by GPA (rounded to hundredth),
[Berkeley</a> is #4 while CLS is tied with two others for #6. Not a huge gap. Ranked among the T14 by LSAT, though, CLS is #3, while Berkeley is dead-last at #14.](<a href=“http://leiterrankings.com/students/2008student_quality.shtml]Berkeley”>Brian Leiter Student Quality, 2008)</p>

<p>[url=<a href=“http://leiterrankings.com/students/2008student_quality.shtml][/url”>Brian Leiter Student Quality, 2008][/url</a>]</p>

<p>*
NB: You are correct that yield rate and admissions percentage are basically identical (In fact, UCB has a slight edge in both). This is, in my judgment, a reflection of UCB’s status as an in-state school (lower tuition) and, more importantly, a reflection on UCB’s idiosyncratic admissions process. Because UCB has a different admissions process, competition for its admits is less intense.</p>

<p>(Imagine the median CLS student, who had a 3.7/172; where else would he have gotten into? Imagine the mean UCB student, who has a 167/3.77. Where else is he getting in?)*</p>

<hr>

<p>Those were my core assertions. You added a straw man.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This wasn’t part of my claim. Nonetheless, I’m curious. So let me pull up the only issue of USN which I have, the 2007 issue. I recognize it’s a little old, so I will have to retract the statement if this has changed.</p>

<p>The peer assessment score gives CLS a 0.2-pointe edge. Huge? No, but it’s the same as the gap between Harvard and Columbia. The lawyers/judges score is again 0.2. Huge? Again, no, but the gap to Harvard/Yale/Stanford is only 0.1 points.</p>

<p>So the gap from Harvard to Columbia is about the same – or perhaps even smaller – than the gap from Columbia to Berkeley.</p>

<p>In other words, if you’re going to claim that Berkeley is basically identical to Columbia, you also have to be prepared to argue that Harvard is basically identical to Columbia.</p>

<hr>

<p>Finally, however, all this is only half of what I said. The other half is this:

</p>

<p>That’s the component I’ll continue to emphasize. This is the point the OP made, and it’s absolutely correct.</p>

<p>He made the right choice.</p>

13

<p>“She” :)</p>

<p>I’ll admit to having second thoughts after signing on for $48,000 in loans for the 2009-2010 academic year. However, I’m also really excited and I am sure I’m going to have a great time!</p>

14

<p>Wow, my apologies!</p>

<hr>

<p>Addition to my previous post:</p>

<p>I should also note that I understand the gap is small. Indeed, very small.</p>

<p>In any case, the personal considerations here were the overriding factor. The fact that they happened to coincide with what I think is the better school was lucky, but I think subjective rather than objective factors ought to control (within limits) when in conflict.</p>

<p>It’s a small difference. I completely understand that.</p>

15

<p>Columbia might be slightly better but Berkeley is on the move its expanding its faculty by at least 25 percent, building a whole new library and connection building to the business school. Bluedevilmike fails to point out Berkeley has a lower acceptance rate than Columbia. Berkeley looks at GPA more than LSAT. It doesn’t mean that Berkeley students are not on par with Columbia. I would go with Berkeley with the lower costs, much nicer weather, and I believe under Edley’s (a law school mentor to Obama) leadership the school has got alot going for it and will only be getting better in the coming years.</p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>. .</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

17

<p>BDM,</p>

<p>I tried to send you a PM but your mailbox is full.</p>