<p>I am entering Cornell ILR Class of 2012 and considering Law School in the future.
Is it true that Harvard, Yale, Stanford Undergraduates have much more chances at entering TOP 5 Law Schools?
I hope not...lol</p>
<p>my gut feeling is that HYS has much love for their own undergraduates. So HYS (and kids from a few other select schools-- like Princeton-Williams etc), may be able to break through with an admission to HYS Law with a bit of a lower LSAT (maybe 170 LSAT) than the rest of you mere mortals.
Average Harvard LSAT score is around 166, so I have to assume alot of Harvard undergrads are getting into Harvard law with LSAT scores in the 170 range.<br>
for the rest of you -- you'd probably need an LSAT of at least 172 (maybe higher) to even have a shot of being admitted into HYS.<br>
If you can get a good GPA and a 172 LSAT ( which I believe is top 1 % of LSAT applicants), you will have a decent shot at top 5 law school.
-but why don't you concentrate your efforts and enjoy your undergrad experience.
if you are still in HS and are already thinking about Law school admission, I think you should just learn to chill out and relax a bit.<br>
enjoy Cornell- my kid is ILR Class of 2008.</p>
<p>I hear what Marny is saying, but the flip side of that coin is that HYS are also likely recieving a disproportionate number of apps from their own undergrads. So while more spots may go to undergrads from that school (ex. Harvard undergrads to Harvard Law), the overall quality of the applicants might have to be higher so as not to have the entire law class coming from a single undergrad school.</p>
<p>unless someone works in admission from HYS- we'll never know the REAL answer. But the 25 % - 75 % LSAT at HY is 169 - 175 ( or thereabouts) with Stanfords 25%- 75% LSAT range is 167-172.
somehow I doubt my ILR kid with a 167 is going to get into Stanford. I would bet the 169-171 HYS undergrad has a much better shot at gaining admission into their own law schools than all other kids with comparable LSAT's.<br>
Get a 175 LSAT, and even a SUNY Oswego grad (my alma mater) has a shot at HYS Law.<br>
again- without info from a HYS admission person, it's all speculation. But for most "common folk", I wouldn't count on a HYS admission with less than a 172 LSAT.
I believe the HYS undergrad can gain admittance to their own law school with a LSAT score less than 172.</p>
<p>For the last time, undergrad prestige is of little to no importance to adcoms. Look at yale's list of students and where they went to undergrad. One went to Santa Fe Community College, literally dozens went to obscure state schools.</p>
<p>To sum up:</p>
<p>GPA and LSAT= 90%</p>
<p>presitge of ugrad institution= .01%</p>
<p>Obviously the reason HYS sends their undergrads to their law schools is because they attract the brightest, most creative, most involved students in the country for undergrad. Thus they are more likely to get stellar LSATs, recs, and ECs...as for GPA, we all know these institutions have a reputation for grade inflation, but it is unquestionably difficult to get a 3.75+ and these schools, a prereq for any of those law schools. But adcoms give those at less prestigious colleges the benefit of the doubt, so they weigh GPAs and LSATs equally whether from Yale or Southern Missoula State Tech.</p>
<p>I disagree with both marn and horsegirl.</p>
<p>marny is right in that most LSs --not just YHS--have a slight bias in favor of their own grads. Indeed, I would say that Cornell itself is one of the worst "offenders" out there--it is VERY biased in favor of its own grads, particularly ILR types. For the bias to help at all, you have to be "in the zone." Nobody knows when they start college what GPA and LSAT they will end up with, so that makes it impossible to choose an UG college where you are guaranteed to end up "in the zone." If you end up with a 3.4 and 160 LSAT, having attended Harvard College is NOT going to help you into Harvard Law. </p>
<p>From what I've seen, YHS cut their grads NO slack in terms of LSAT. They don't have to. The median LSAT at Yale College runs about 164 or 165; Harvard College's is usually about one point higher. (Last time I looked, Cornell's was about 160. Since I think Marny's D has taken the test, she should know for that admissions cycle. It's on the results report.)</p>
<p>Where they do cut a bit of slack is for kids who are "in the zone" in terms of GPA and have good ECs. So, as I wrote in another thread, I think Harvard Law is going to be more likely to take the kid with a 3.4 GPA and 178 LSAT who was managing editor of the Crimson. They also tend to do this for varsity athletes--no matter where they went to college. Someone who playied quarterback for a big 10 college and has a high LSAT won't be expected to have the same UGPA as someone whose most important EC was being social chair of his/her dorm/GLO. But the person reading the rec at Harvard Law School is going to know how time-consuming being the managing editor o the Crimson is--and would have very little idea how time consuming a similar position would be at many other colleges. </p>
<p>The other advantage is that quite often faculty KNOW the folks writing your recs. Say Prof X at Stanford is known as a tough, but fair grader and is highly regarded by other faculty at Stanford. Overall, I.Want Tobeatty's GPA is a little weak--mostly due to low grades frosh year. Prof X writes a letter or rec for Tobeatty that says that Tobeatty is an outstanding student and has contributed a great deal to classroom discussion. That LOR from Prof X is going to help more than an equally glowing one from Prof Y at Cornell ILR whom nobody at Stanford knows personally. That's just human nature. </p>
<p>But YHS taking folks with a lower LSAT from their own undergraduate colleges in the AGGREGATE? I don't think that happens. I do think they are more likely to take one or two folks with extremely high GPAs and lower LSATs, but the group as a whole will have LSATs at or above the median.</p>
<p>Mr. Wong. you can get into YHS from any college in the country. However, last time I checked, out of about 600 JD candidates at Yale, about 150 went to Yale or Harvard College. If you want to believe that 25% of the top candidates in the nation went to those two colleges, be my guest. Personally, I don't.</p>
<p>Most of the folks who went to little known colleges have one of a few things going for them: (1) they are URMs, (2) they are from socially disadvantaged backgrounds, no matter what the color of their skins; (3) they have already won some major fellowship or other award, e.g., they are Marshall, Truman, Goldwater, Rhodes, Fullbright, etc. scholars; (3) they have substantial work experience during which they have been unusually successful in some field and/or have demonstrated a life-long commitment to public service or some cause.</p>
<p>I'm overdoing the posting today, but let me deal with the grade inflation nonsense.</p>
<p>As I've posted before, it's up to each LS to decide for itself whether all grades should be treated equally. However, they are given one piece of information to use to evaluate grade inflation. The LSDAS processes the transcripts of virtually all LS applicants--certainly all of those to top LSs. They put these grades onto the same scale. Then they calculate the median GPA of all students applying to LS that year. According to Ariesathena, a former poster here, they also give some sort of general ranking--like your 3.8 at Cornell puts you in the 75th percentile of Cornell applicants to law school, GPA wise. The numbers the colleges publish as the median GPA do NOT matter AT ALL. It's the median LSDAS calculated GPA of LS applicants from your college which is used. </p>
<p>They also calculate the median LSAT of the applicants from each school. Some colleges, such as Yale, actually post this data publicly. So, I know that Yale College's median LSAT has been in the 164-165 range. </p>
<p>To get an idea of how grade-inflated a college is, LS admissions officers compare the median LSDAS calculated GPA of all applicants with the median LSAT of all applicants. In a perfect world, in the AGGREGATE, all students with a 160 LSAT should have a 3.0 GPA. (Drop the one in front of the 160/20= theoretical should be GPA.) It's the extent to which this deviates that determines how grade inflated a college is in the eyes of LS admissions officers. USING THIS SYSTEM, Harvard and Yale Colleges are NOT particularly grade inflated.</p>
<p>jonri- I do agree. I think you need to be in the ZONE for HYS admission as well as any other top law school. The Zone (which I will assume is the 25-75% LSAT score): For HY, the 25% is 169-170 and for Stanford it is 167. My point is that it would be extremely rare for a non HYSP (AWS) undergrad to get into HYS law school with a 167-170 LSAT which is still within the Zone.<br>
HYS is obviously accepting kids with those LSAT grades as proven by 25%-75% scores, but I will safely assume these kids are not coming from Cornell, Penn State or just about any other school in the country. I believe the kids gaining acceptance to HYS who score at the Bottom of THE ZONE are UG's from HYSP AWS. I think that is the reality, and there is nothing wrong with that. The "elite" love the "elite".<br>
Stop thinking that everyone at HYS gets a 174 on their LSAT's. Apparently the "average" Harvard kid gets (gasp!!) 166. Geez- even my Cornell kid did better than that!
And does Cornell give an extra point or two to their own? I'm sure they do (in the same manner HYS gives their UG's a break). But as Cornells 25-75% is 166-168, I would doubt too many Cornell kids get into Cornell Law with much less than a 164. The same way Harvard probably doesn't take its own UG's if they are 2 points or so under their zone (167).</p>
<p>It is understandable that Law schools give a bit of wiggle roon to their UG's-
so why is it difficult to understand that some HYS undergrads can get into HYS law school with a 169 LSAT's. That score is "within the Zone" (as you put it).<br>
I find nothing wrong with a college giving their own UG's a bit of a break as long as it is within reason. In fact I think it is a good thing. It shows a sense of loyalty to their own students.
I'm sure Cornell is no worse an "Offender" than HYS.</p>
<p>I find it curious then that some on these boards, need to run to the defense of HYS when in fact their actions are no different than most other schools.</p>
<p>and Jonri- Just curious. What's an "ILR type"??</p>
<p>BTW- Happy New Year to All.</p>
<p>
[quote]
According to Ariesathena, a former poster here, they also give some sort of general ranking--like your 3.8 at Cornell puts you in the 75th percentile of Cornell applicants to law school, GPA wise.
[/quote]
As a recent (this year) applicant, I can verify this.</p>
<p>
[quote]
USING THIS SYSTEM, Harvard and Yale Colleges are NOT particularly grade inflated.
[/quote]
I actually did the math here:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/266240-question-about-top-law-schools.html#post3365648%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/266240-question-about-top-law-schools.html#post3365648</a></p>
<p>"Most of the folks who went to little known colleges have one of a few things going for them: (1) they are URMs, (2) they are from socially disadvantaged backgrounds, no matter what the color of their skins; (3) they have already won some major fellowship or other award, e.g., they are Marshall, Truman, Goldwater, Rhodes, Fullbright, etc. scholars; (3) they have substantial work experience during which they have been unusually successful in some field and/or have demonstrated a life-long commitment to public service or some cause."</p>
<p>No, most of them have high LSATs and GPAs. They are probably considerably less likely to have a prestigious fellowship or award, while the other factors are probably fairly equal, but all are certainly incidental and certainly not possessed by a majority.</p>
<p>"But YHS taking folks with a lower LSAT from their own undergraduate colleges in the AGGREGATE? I don't think that happens. I do think they are more likely to take one or two folks with extremely high GPAs and lower LSATs, but the group as a whole will have LSATs at or above the median."</p>
<p>Harvard's stats:
GPA 75th / 25th percentiles: 3.95 / 3.75
LSAT 75th / 25th percentiles: 175 / 170</p>
<p>Average Matriculant from Yale to HLS: 3.77/ 170.8
Average Acceptance from Princeton to HLS: 3.74/171</p>
<p>HLS definitely favors students not only from H but from YP (and I'm assuming S) as well. Most every top law school favors students from HYP, its not just HLS or SLS though. Its not even the fact that HLS is letting in people from HYP with lower GPAs, its lower LSATs as well. Compare the figures available from Yale with those from Berkeley if you're not convinced.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.yale.edu/career/students/gradprof/lawschool/media/lawstats.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.yale.edu/career/students/gradprof/lawschool/media/lawstats.pdf</a>
Career</a> Center - Profile of Law School Admissions - UC Berkeley</p>
<p>so Pimp. If I am reading your info correctly, the "average" Yale and Princeton grad can get into Harvard law at the 25th % or a GPA/LSAT-- 3.76/ 171. There's nothing wrong with that as those #'s "fall into the Zone" and are within the 25%-75% range.</p>
<p>That probably explains why so many HY grads go to HY law, as those stats of 3.76/171 usually get admittance to schools like UVA, U Mich or other T 6-14 schools. </p>
<p>I guess it confirms my point- that grads of some elite institutions can get into Harvard law with a 3.76 and a 171 LSAT, but for those of you attending all other schools, you ain't getting into Harvard with those same statistics.
--in fact you probably need over a 173 for any consideration. </p>
<p>but my advice is to choose the UG school which is the best fit and which works for you- not on which will give you the best shot at Harvard Law school.</p>
<p>First, in reply to #11: I was not clear in post #7. I agree that you only need the numbers to get into Harvard. My remarks about needing something else were about Yale Law. ( I was responding to post #5.)</p>
<p>Second, one clarification. A few years ago, Harvard Law reported that over 12% of the entering class had GPAs above 4.0. Yale UG does not give A+ grades and I assume that YHS is aware of that fact. Berkeley DOES give A+ grades. So does Stanford--or at least it did as of a couple of years ago. IMO, it is not fair to compare the GPA of students admitted to YHS Law from schools with and without A+ grades. For example, I know of a recent grad of Yale Law who had a 4.0 as an undergrad at Stanford. However, he also had received a B- in one course. That would not give him a 4.0 at either Harvard or Yale College. </p>
<p>Based on the wording of post #12, the poster is comparing apples and oranges. Princeton ADMITTED data and Yale MATRICULATED data are two different things. </p>
<p>Still, I agree that it is easier to get into YHS from a top UG. (I think I said that re Yale Law in post #7. )</p>
<p>"unless someone works in admission from HYS- we'll never know the REAL answer."</p>
<p>Nope, all we need is the admissions grids from one of those undergrads. I have mine, but they are now too dated to be very informative -- they're based on 1998 data. Back then, if you're curious, the LSATs of Harvard College alumni admitted to HLS & YLS were very close to the means at those schools, but the their GPAs were noticeably lower (one or two tenths of a point below the law school mean). To me, that was a pretty clear sign that law schools were cutting the H undergrads slack in the GPA department. But again, ten years ago. The scene may have changed.</p>
<p>Now, this is pure hunch: I think another advantage in being an HYPS undergrad is that YHS are never going to worry that they took too many kids from your school. Let's say the class of 2008 was the best class ever to enroll at Example U, and it's going to graduate a disproportionately large group of hard-working and ambitious kids this year. Are YHS going to admit 50 kids from Example U? I don't know about that, even if 500 of them apply. YHS have shown that they're willing to go very deep into the class at Harvard and Yale. I wonder if you get the same benefit of the doubt as a graduate of Example U.</p>
<p>In response to the discussions above, I just want to comment that it isn't necessarily accurate to say, "the average student at so and so school can get in to Harvard/Yale/Stanford, etc with X gpa and Y LSAT score" based on the means of accepted applicants from a given year. This might be closer to correct if the school provided the median of accepted applicants instead of the mean (though still a little problematic), but the means are very much subject to outliers (especially with relatively small numbers of admitted students). </p>
<p>For example, say 10 students from Cornell were admitted to Duke Law. About half got in with numbers close to the average for Duke (so LSAT scores around a 169). The others, however, were aiming higher and only applying to Duke as a safety. These students each had a 173 LSAT. The mean for admitted students comes out, then, as a 171. Does this mean that the average student applying from Cornell needs to have a 171 to get into Duke? Of course not-- students probably should have somewhere around a 168/169. Duke just happened to admit 5 very qualified students from Cornell.</p>
<p>And it works in reverse as well. Say 10 Yale students were admitted to Harvard Law. 7 had LSATs around Harvard's mean-- let's say a 172. But 3 had something very special about them not reflected in their numbers, and were accepted with a 167. The mean LSAT works out to a 170.5. But does this mean that the average Yale student can get in with a 170ish score? Probably not.</p>
<p>And, as noted in the Berkeley link above, there is indeed quite some variation in means from each sending school from year to year.</p>
<p>"based on the means of accepted applicants from a given year"</p>
<p>If you have a Harvard undergrad grid, you don't have a mean/median problem because they show the raw data for each individual (as well as that individual's gender, race, where they matriculated, etc.). Outliers jump out at you. They're relatively few in number, and the median's very close to the mean.</p>
<p>Besides, n is so large -- 100+ kids accepted at HLS each year, 30+ each at YLS and SLS -- that outliers shouldn't be such a big deal. It would be really unusual to see a significant shift in mean from year to year in a group that size, given a data set where the variance is low (i.e. ~98% of the accepted students each year have LSATs in the 96th-99th percentile). Note the stability of the mean LSAT at Harvard College: it's been either 165 or 166 every year for the last 10 years, which isn't surprising given the large n and the cap on scores at 180.</p>
<p>Stanford LS is really tough on Berkeley grads. :D</p>