So here it goes:

Is it really about what you study or at the end of day is it the school that you attend that makes the difference regardless of the area that you want to break into?

Any views are highly appreciated!!!

Hi Wheretogo. I don't usually look at the questions outside the UK/Ireland page, but I saw your question today and I've felt like answering... I think in the end only the school you went to is what really matters. I've talked to a lot of people who've got LLM degrees from both US and UK-based schools and they've all told me the same thing: unless you're into a very specific specialisation what you study won't really matter. Recruiters tend to focus on the university rather than the modules or courses youve taken up. However, things may be a little different if youre leaning to an academic-focused career.

this has already been asked in a variety of different guises on these forums.

broadly, the consensus is that

-it's about the reputation of the university
-UNLESS you are interested in a very specific area where a university has recognised excellence and that expertise is the reason for choosing it.
- in a perfect world you get to go to a stellar university which also happens to be the leader in your fields of interest.

even this depends on what you do with yourself while you're there. you can make yourself a more valuable prospect coming from a university with a less prestigious name if you apply yourself and work on gaining experience (work experience, publications, general extracurricular stuff) than if you went to a very prestigious university and scraped by on the bare minimum with nothing else to add (though the reality is that most people attending prestigious universities will be aware of the need to add value too).


Incidentally, I think it's wrong that brand name should play such a pivotal role in the launching of your career. Sometimes those same 'prestigious' universities are focused on churning out a particular sort of person and offer less opportunities to explore personal interests and take risks than a less 'branded' university might. I went to LSE for undergrad and it was on the whole a great experience - some of the real highs of my life were experienced while there - but my God, does it ever push you towards becoming a corporate lawyer (this is the institutional culture, not individuals there). And it seems friends who went to other 'branded' universities have absorbed something of their respective institutional cultures too...maybe it's just elitism/snobbery, who knows. Anyway the point this boils down to is that the name factor seems to foster a certain sort of homogeneity which isn't always a good thing as far as I'm concerned. But this answer belongs to a slightly different question than the one you asked ;)

I know that there are countries, in particualr in continental Europe, where it is not that important where you have earned the LLM degree. They just want that you have the degree in roder to prove your ability to adapt, socially connect and last but not least to prove that your english skills are competitive...so, if you are not from England or the US, the school (if it's not Harvard or Oxbridge) does not count that much!

Thanks for your views.

I am training in the UK as a lawyer (but am from overseas) and although I was accepted in LLM's here after I qualify, I am leaning towards the US now, namely top 15 schools, specifically the University at Texas at Austin and Duke.

I wonder with a degree from UT Austin what would employers think. After all its top 15 in the U.S.
Although its not Harvard or Yale its one of the finest law schools in the U.S.