Different graduate programs, medical school, business school, and law school were all feasible possibilities for me. Eventually, I determined that law school is my best option because I know it will teach me applicable skills that will be useful in any future career. It would provide me with the most opportunities and options than any other program in my academic career.
I applied to most of the top tier law schools including Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Berkeley. These schools required a standard application fee. Through the LSAC, I was able to get a fee waiver for other law schools such as Michigan, Virginia, Georgetown, Chicago, NYU, Columbia, and Duke.
I was accepted by all but 3 of these schools; I dropped out after being on the Yale waiting list. Berkeley and UVA turned me down. My final decision was between Harvard, Stanford, and Penn, who offered me a near-full scholarship.
The US News and World Report states that there is a clear top tier among law schools: Yale, Harvard, and Stanford. The general sense is that if you are admitted to one of these programs, you attend unless there is a compelling reason not to. Qualities of these schools that justify this include: the lack of a grading system to grade student performance, the extent of national recruitment, and the high internship and academic placement rates of these programs. I eliminated all other schools that did not have these qualities from my consideration list with the exception of Penn. I booked this option due to the scholarship offer Penn provided me.
Three points helped determine my decision between Penn, Harvard, and Stanford:
- ranges: Penn uses the standard grading system that is familiar in undergraduate schools (for example, A+/A/A- and so on). Yale, Harvard, and Stanford, on the other hand, operate without “degrees” in the traditional sense. Instead, students are subject to categorization on an “Honors/Pass/Fail” system. From the information I have gathered, this change promotes a culture that is less focused on competition and grades and more on individual learning. Personally, I feel less stressed and enjoy my studies much more. I think the change has been overwhelmingly positive for me because I can focus on the material I’m learning without being distracted by the pressure of grades.
- Opportunities after graduation: A non-legal career after graduating from law school is still an important possibility for me. Employers, whose focuses are not legal, generally consider only the “Top 3” law schools. Similarly, legal opportunities are also available for the best students in the best schools. This is less true for mid-level and lower law schools. The increased chances of finding future opportunities became a major attraction of Harvard and Stanford for me.
- Financial costs: Paying for law school is expensive. However, there are numerous options that can help cover the cost. Loan repayment programs at each school are designed to help ease the financial burden.
In the end, the choice was between Harvard and Stanford. I sought out friends and graduates of each program to get their advice. This was obviously a “high class issue” as each person emphasized that I couldn’t possibly be wrong in any way.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Key Differences Between Harvard and Stanford:
- class size: Harvard has about 550 students per incoming class, while Stanford is closer to 170. Both schools divide their classes into “Sections” during the first year (Harvard: 7 sections of 75-80; Stanford: 6 sections of 25 -30). At both schools, students spend their first year almost exclusively with their Section. For me, attending a larger program was a priority. The advantages of this include having the scale to run more programs at the law school and having a larger and broader alumni network to connect with. Especially since I entered law school planning to follow a non-legal path afterwards, it was crucial to be able to find an adequate number of other like-minded law students who could help support me.
- Location: Having grown up in the Midwest and working on the West Coast, my goal was to get a taste of life in the East to help determine where I would like to settle after graduation. There was a specific advantage for me in Palo Alto, which is access to the startup and venture capital community, but this was negated as Boston also has a lot of opportunities in that field. While the weather in Palo Alto far exceeds that of Cambridge and my experiences thus far have made me plan to return to the West Coast, my East Coast experience has served its intended purpose.
- International and non-legal opportunities: It was rewarding to work in Europe and Asia during the months that I was applying to law schools. The people I interacted with respected the Harvard name, and I was able to find Harvard Law grads in unexpected places (thanks to the great classes and alumni network). Because I hoped to find work abroad and outside of the legal profession, I finalized my decision and chose to attend Harvard. pushed me to choose the Harvard brand in the end.
- Programs Offered: Going into law school, I was concerned with three qualifications: (1) Access to classes at a top business school; (2) Courses in venture capital and business law; and (3) Negotiation courses. Both Stanford and Harvard satisfy the first criterion, with Stanford slightly favored. Stanford specialized more on the second criterion, but Harvard’s size also helped offer comparable courses and specialized seminars in this area. Ultimately, the Harvard Negotiation Program was the main difference between the two schools. This was the determining factor in making sure that Harvard is the best school for me.
While there were times during the Boston winter when I checked out the Palo Alto weather and wished I could be at Stanford, making my decision based on a clear and overall assessment keeps me convinced I made the right decision.
