<p>Law school admissions is number driven. GPA and LSAT are the main factors.
If only numbers matter why HLS has 113 students from Yale, 48 from Columbia and 1 from the University of Miami?</p>
<p>Largely because those students have already been through one sorting process that was, to a significant degree, based on numbers.</p>
<p>Undergraduate schools don't really matter. It's all about GPA/ LSAT, the students at the top 25 universities in the country just seem to have a high GPA/ LSAT score. They weren't admitted because of where they graduated from.</p>
<p>if anything you may not getting admitted if you don't excel at a top school. the sad true is that uu can get a 4.0 at a crappy place, study hard and ace the lsat and then go to a top 10 bus. school. of course, this assumes one has the intelligence to ace the lsat.</p>
<p>hmm I would assume the better choice would be to go to a competitive undergrad school and do your best there and on the LSAT. "Acing the LSAT" is far easier said than done.</p>
<p>^That is true if you can manage just as high of a GPA there as you would have at the less competitive school. But if you believe that you would manage a considerably higher GPA at the less competitive school than at the competitive one then go to the less competitive one.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Of all the 3.7+/170+ students this year that I've seen on LSN, Chiashu, and among my group of friends, the only who weren't able to get in a top 6 were students from no-name schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Without meaning to speak for speds, this seems significant to me.</p>
<p>I think that there are lots of reasons why students from top colleges get into top law schools in greater numbers, percentage-wise, than their peers from other colleges. Yes, it is certainly true that someone who got into a top college is more likely, on average, to be a good standardized test taker (did well on the SATs, and while the tests are different, test taking skills enabled same person to do well on the LSATs). However, getting into top law schools is not solely a numbers game (though I know that few on this board seem to want to hear this perspective). There are other factors involved, and the college a student attended can be one of these factors. </p>
<p>Students at top colleges have a lot going for them. These students are often surrounded by other "pre-professional" students and students who plan to seek other advanced degrees, who are looking to study, do well, find internships, etc. in order to get through to that next step. That pushes other students to aspire to and to focus on those things themselves while in college. Also, because so many students at top colleges are going to seek advanced and professional degrees, the facilities and resources for planning post-graduate education/pre-professional studies available at these colleges is generally a well-oiled machine set up to help these students achieve their goals. In addition, students at top colleges, at least in part because of the name brand value of their colleges (and, yes, coupled with the fact that these students are often very good students too), may have access to better research opportunities, internships, alumni networks, etc. </p>
<p>Lastly, I don't think that you can ever discount the value that having a name brand school on your transcript and resume has when applying to law school. Law schools admissions professionals know which schools are more competitive than others. They also know that X number of students from Y college have done well here over a number of years and have gone on to do great things, so they will assume that if a student does well at Y college, they are probably going to do well at this particular law school too. It's human nature to make assumptions based upon our past experiences.</p>
<p>At the end of the day, top law schools have their choice of students with high LSAT scores and high GPAs, and not all of them will be accepted. For most of these students, the high LSAT score and high GPA is merely what qualifies them for consideration for admission. It's the other factors in one's application, including the college that student attended (as well as work experience, honors theses, proven leadership abilities, publications, proof that one has sought out challenges, academic and otherwise, dedication, etc.), that will make the difference. </p>
<p>There are many other factors, too, but these are the obvious ones that immediately come to mind for me.</p>
<p>I think it is true that law school admissions isn't ALL about numbers, but they do play a large part in the admissions process. With that said, its is nice to go to an elite school, take on a difficult major, or have ECs and leadership, but if being an electrical engineering major at MIT prevents you from having a high GPA (3.5+) and a LSAT score in the range of the law school your applying to, its not worth it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but if being an electrical engineering major at MIT prevents you from having a high GPA (3.5+) and a LSAT score in the range of the law school your applying to, its not worth it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some schools, including Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, will make exceptions: just be sure to apply very early in the cycle.</p>
<p>For the same LSAT a 3.5 from MIT is better than a 4.0 from U State (execpt Michigan, UC Berkeley, UT Austin). MIT has 13 students at HLS, while U Missouri 1, U Kansas 3, etc. For sure hundreds of students from these schools have 4.0 gpa.
Undergrad school does matter for admission</p>
<p>^Wow, dude you need to take a class in stats, lol. First off, you don't know the GPA of those students at MIT, they could be above a 3.5. Secondly, location is also a factor. MIT is in the same state as Harvard and many of the kids in those state schools would most likely want to work in that state so they go to a law school in that state. And how do you know there are hundreds of people with 4.0s at those state schools?</p>
<p>Also, what about LSAT score? What I'm trying to say is that there are far too many factors for you to come to the conclusion that you did. This has been debated MANY TIMES on this board and each time it has been said that GPA/LSAT is FAR more important than your UG school (as long as the school is top tier). UG school might still be a small factor but it is still best to go to the RESPECTABLE school where you believe you will do best.</p>
<p>That is possibly the worst statistical analysis I have ever seen.</p>
<p>Hahahahahaha. This is hilarious.</p>
<p>I know people. It was a joke, get it? All I'm saying is there are many factors for low admission from a school into HLS besides just UG prestige.</p>
<p>I won't speak for speds, but my surprised disapproval was certainly not directed at your post.</p>
<p>"For the same LSAT a 3.5 from MIT is better than a 4.0 from U State (execpt Michigan, UC Berkeley, UT Austin). MIT has 13 students at HLS, while U Missouri 1, U Kansas 3, etc. For sure hundreds of students from these schools have 4.0 gpa. Undergrad school does matter for admission"</p>
<p>Schools such as the University of Florida, Maryland, and UNC have also sent 13 students to Harvard. I think we could all agree that these schools aren't on the same level as MIT or University of Chicago, which also sent 13 students.</p>
<p>Schools such as UF, Maryland, and UNC have quite a few more students.</p>
<p>"I won't speak for speds, but my surprised disapproval was certainly not directed at your post."</p>
<p>Oh, man these forums really need a quote feature, lol.</p>
<p>The point is that the prestige of the undergrad institution isn't a big factor in law school admissions.</p>