Do Law Schools not like to see undergrad business students?

[crazi4uni]

<p>Is USC Marshall considered a prestigious enough undergrad business school by top Law Schools?</p>

[crazi4uni]

<p>Is USC Marshall considered a prestigious enough undergrad business school by top Law Schools?</p>

[futurenyustudent]

<p>Business school seems to me like a big waste of time if you’re not learning accounting or finance. There’s nothing substantive to learn in, for example, management. Whatever the hell that means. The best way to learn “management” in my opinion is to go manage a company. Yeah, you might fall on your face a few times, but really, it’s not something that you can learn effectively in school.</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>^that’s why the top IB and MC firms recruit mostly from top privates that ironically don’t have any undergrad business program. even these firms don’t believe in undergrad business programs. you learn those at work. the only exception is accounting major. i also agree that a course in financial accounting is useful even for non-accountants.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>Correlation≠Causation</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>^speaking of that, didn’t I tell you just because your friend got 3.9 at LS doesn’t mean her undergrad business degree was rigorous (because she’s just smart)?</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>

didn’t I tell you just because your friend got a 3.9 at LS doesn’t mean her undergrad business degree was rigorous (because she’s just smart)?

</p>

<p>That really wasn’t the conclusion I was going for, but I’m sure you assumed that while you were stroking your ego. </p>

<p>

that’s a clearer example of correlation vs causation. lol!

</p>

<p>Is the ad hominem tu quoque fallacy how you get out of all your arguments? You’ve done it twice in this thread.</p>

<p>

wasn’t you the one that said u-grad business schools are feeders to IB?

</p>

<p>And I still stand by that claim. Clearly, you cannot seem to comprehend that IB’s recruiting at non-business programs is compatible with the claim that u-grad business schools (at least reputable ones) are feeders into IB.</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>

I don’t know what constitutes a “rigorous business major,” but you know it when you see it. Incidentally, my study partner during 1L did international business from an unknown UG and ended up with a 3.9+ for the year (easily the top 5% of our class).

</p>

<p>i don’t know how you can blame me for misunderstanding you…</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>Some basic reading comprehension training:</p>

<p>

I don’t know what constitutes a “rigorous business major,” but you know it when you see it. Incidentally, my study partner during 1L did international business from an unknown UG and ended up with a 3.9+ for the year (easily the top 5% of our class).

</p>

<p>The above was the premise (the example of my study partner).</p>

<p>

To get into or succeed in a law school, the business degree need not come from a name brand institution, and I’m pretty sure it doesn’t hurt in any tangible way (of course, fluff business majors like communications won’t pass muster, just like any other fluff major (i.e., sociology, american studies, etc.).

</p>

<p>And the above is the conclusion. I bolded “need,” just for you SamLee. “Need” implies necessity, or truth in all possible worlds. The example of my study partner shows one possible world in which that is false. Thus, the “necessity” is refuted.</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>^So you are doing all that just to show what everyone already knows…of course it’s possible, nobody argues otherwise. The OP asked “Do Law Schools not like to see undergrad business students?”, not “Do Law School not accept any undergrad business students?” (no one is thinking about that) </p>

<p>And what a way to mislead. I was referring to your phrase “you know it when you see it”. </p>

<p>

Clearly, you cannot seem to comprehend that IB’s recruiting at non-business programs is compatible with the claim that u-grad business schools (at least reputable ones) are feeders into IB.

</p>

<p>“at least reputable ones”…nice way to backpedal…let’s see, Wharton (most selective at Penn), Stern (most selective at NYU), and maybe Ross (most selective at UMich). Other than that, can’t really think of others. Really don’t see how few out of hundreds of programs translate to “u-grad business programs are feeders to IB”? I don’t see how these few programs are representative of the rest. I bet hotel management at cornell is probably not a fluff major; it doesn’t represent others. These are the most selective programs; so it’s reasonable to question whether this is about the business program or about the caliber of students. By the way, Wharton about half the Wharton requirement is, I believe, on liberal arts courses.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>I’ll just assume you lost the previous argument, and now we’re going to what I originally argued against you for; I wouldn’t want you unnecessarily to stroke your ego, would I?</p>

<p>

“at least reputable ones”…nice way to backpedal

</p>

<p>Not really backpedaling. I think it’s pretty clear that I was neither implying by strict implication or implicature that any ol’ business UG will feed into ibanking. To attribute that view to me is just patronization. Given your history in this thread, I won’t put that above you.</p>

<p>

…let’s see, Wharton (most selective at Penn),

</p>

<p>Cool.</p>

<p>

Stern (most selective at NYU)

</p>

<p>Really? Thought Tisch was more selective, but that’s irrelevant. It’s kind of funny how you say “x is the most selective of y.” That might mean something when you’re talking about Penn, but not really when you’re talking about NYU. But nice try.</p>

<p>

and maybe Ross (most selective at UMich).

</p>

<p>See NYU, above.</p>

<p>

Other than that, can’t really think of others.

</p>

<p>Really? You can’t think of MIT, UVA, Georgetown, UT Austin’s BHP, Berkeley, Cornell, and Emory? </p>

<p>

Really don’t see how few out of hundreds of programs translate to “u-grad business programs are feeders to IB”?

</p>

<p>Yes, when the world of possible business schools that could feed into ibanks is limited to what you remember, I can understand how you’d fail to see a lot of things!</p>

<p>

These are the most selective programs; so it’s reasonable to question whether this is about the business program or about the caliber of students.

</p>

<p>Again, I question this leap in logic. Being the most selective x in y school isn’t exactly an accomplishment in itself. It really depends on what “y” is. If we’re talking about Penn, then it surely means something (same for MIT, maybe Berkeley, and definitely for Cornell). Telling me that NYU Stern is the most selective NYU school really doesn’t tell me about the caliber of the students with respect to other students at top universities.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>

“Do Law Schools not like to see undergrad business students?”, not “Do Law School not accept any undergrad business students?” (no one is thinking about that)

</p>

<p>Nah. The argument was more like, “clearly there’s nothing as a matter of principle preventing an undergraduate B student from succeeding at or getting into law school.” You might question the overall utility of that conclusion, but that doesn’t mean it’s incorrect (which was your original claim).</p>

<p>

And what a way to mislead. I was referring to your phrase “you know it when you see it”.

</p>

<p>If by “mislead” you mean, “assume that the people reading the post have a basic grasp of logic and reading comprehension,” then yes, I “misled.”</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>NYU Stern’s SAT average is close to 1440 and it’s a big program, hence providing enough talents to pick from. The MIT grads that got into IBs come from various departments, not just Sloan (again, it’s indicative that it’s more about the talents than “business program”). Cornell? Thanks for mentioning that to weaken your point. The most recruited schools are CAS and engineering, not AG (where the business program is)… Austin BHP and Emory…boy, you need to go over to the IB forum and do some readings first</p>

<p>By the way, the fact that you keep engaging ad hominen attack shows more about your character than my ability.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>

By the way, the fact that you keep doing ad hominen attack shows more about your character than my ability.

</p>

<p>I don’t think you know what an ad hominem attack is.
[Philosophy</a>, et cetera: Attacks and Arguments](<a href=“http://www.philosophyetc.net/2005/09/attacks-and-arguments.html]Philosophy”>Philosophy, et cetera: Attacks and Arguments)</p>

<p>

NYU Stern’s SAT average is close to 1440 and it’s a big program,

</p>

<p>Whoa! Close to a 1440!!! That’s like… right in line with “the best and the brightest minds” in the nation, from which the ibanks typically choose. (PS. where do you get the close to 1440 number from? I’m looking for Stern’s mean SAT; can’t find it).</p>

<p>No… not really.</p>

<p>

The MIT grads that got into IBs come from various departments, not just Sloan

</p>

<p>How is this at all informative? First, you don’t give a source. Second, I was never disputing the claim that ibankers can come from non-business majors. You’re losing track of what you’re arguing for.</p>

<p><a href=“again,%20it’s%20indicative%20that%20it’s%20more%20about%20the%20talents%20than” title=“business program”>quote</a>.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>…and the truth of this claim is not incompatible with the notion of undergraduate b-schools being feeders into ibanking.</p>

<p>

Cornell? Thanks for mentioning that to weaken your point. The most recruited schools are CAS and engineering, not AG (where the business program is)…

</p>

<p>Again… doesn’t really say much. Are we talking about absolute numbers, or percentages? If the percentage of those who applied outside of AG and got an offer is substantively higher than that of people in the AG, you might have a point (and that too, only about Cornell). Also, source?</p>

<p>

Austin BHP and Emory…boy, you need to go over to the IB forum and do some readings first

</p>

<p>Man, I wish I could dismiss all my arguments with hyperbole! BOY! HUFF HUFF! BOY! YOU’RE SOOO WRONG. See, I just won the argument!</p>

<p>But no not really. Many of my friends went to Emory and UT for business, and they were swimming in ibanking offers when they got out. I’m not entirely sure how ibanking recruiting works at UT BHP, but I was led to believe that they were “preferred” in comparison to non-BHP students. Made me jealous for all but two seconds.</p>

<p>Oh, and thanks for “refuting” UVA, Berkeley, and Georgetown.</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>

The argument was more like, “clearly there’s nothing as a matter of principle preventing an undergraduate B student from succeeding at or getting into law school.” You might question the overall utility of that conclusion, but that doesn’t mean it’s incorrect (which was your original claim).

</p>

<p>I mentioned nothing about succeeding at law school. Please don’t put words into my mouth. I opined that law school adcom may not look at business major favorably; I am not the only ones that think this way. So far, you have offered nothing to disprove that’s not the case. You can think you got “clear evidence” all you want.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>

I mentioned nothing about succeeding at law school. Please don’t put words into my mouth.

</p>

<p>Is it not possible that I was responding to other people in this thread?</p>

<p>

I opined that law school adcom may not look at business major favorably

</p>

<p>Based on no substantiation (and relatively little experience in the law school admissions process).</p>

<p>

I am not the only ones that think this way.

Therefore, you must be correct.</p>

<p>

So far, you have offered nothing to disprove that’s not the case. You can think you got “clear evidence” all you want.

</p>

<p>Huh? Am I missing something about argumentation here? I believe the person who made the assertion has the burden of proof. You can’t simply say, “X is the case, y,w,z agree with me, and you offer nothing to refute my claim, therefore I’m right and you’re wrong.” Do you realize how daft you’re being?</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>You can read those posts in IB forum and dig around Stern’s average. You are smart so I am sure you can find them without spending all day.</p>

[flowerhead]

<p>Yeah, but the difference between you and me (and this is probably one of the reasons we have dramatically different post counts) is that I don’t care and I refuse to waste my life on an online discussion board.</p>

<p>You disagree with me, and that’s cool. Neither of us has worked in a law school admissions office, so our claims can’t really hold that much weight, and the most we can rely on is anecdotal information. Also, unless one of many people who agree with you is an admissions officer, your claim still doesn’t hold weight (if it helps any, one of the many people who agree with me was an admissions officer at one of HYSCCN).</p>

<p>End of discussion.</p>

[Sam_Lee]

<p>

Richard Montauk:</p>

<p>Quote:
Your specific major matters less than the type of major you choose. What matters is that you choose a serious major. Schools are leery of pre-professional subjects such as business, and those that reward performance talents such as acting. There are some majors that admissions counselors cringe at seeing; communications, criminology and pre-law (even though theoretically pre-law is not a major)<br>

</p>

<p>From Post #21. Also, looking at the other parts of the quote, it’s clear no one favors business majors. Some are against certain subset of it. Two adcom representatives made qualifying comments about business and accounting, suggesting that they are probably biased against them unless the transcripts show a good mix of writing intensive courses. I wasn’t just pulling my opinion out of my a** as you seemingly suggested.</p>

<p>But I second that this should be the end of discussion.</p>

[T14hopeful]

<p>I also agree that business majors are kind of worthless outside of accounting. Even with finance (unless you go to a top notch program like Wharton or Sloan which are more quantitative, which 90% of state schools are not), a lot of it can be learned on the job since its a lot of formulas (like NPV, FV, etc.). I think what’s more important in finance is having an aptitude for problem solving and being quantitative, which most business programs don’t do.</p>

<p>Accounting is a lot more complex IMO and is more difficult to learn on one’s own since there is a lot of regulation/controls which are harder to learn than some formulas in finance. Plus, the tax stuff can get really weird from what I’ve heard.</p>