<p>Will a 3.8 gpa at and Ivy League school mean more to a prospective law school than a 3.8 from, say, George Washington University? How much importance does the law school place on where you went to college. Thanks.</p>
<p>almost zero importance; if youre identical in every way to another applicant and they can only admit one of you, it will be you...otherwise it makes no difference</p>
<p>nope. Not like we're talking about 3.8 from princeton compared to southwestern louisiana tech....</p>
<p>Law schools often look at the average LSAT score of your school to determine it's relative strength. So, I wouldn't go so far as to say that the difference between an Ivy and George Washington doesn't matter.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Law schools often look at the average LSAT score of your school to determine it's relative strength.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wrong. LS's care about LSATs and GPAs so they can pad their #'s and move up or maintain their current rankings. If you can get a high gpa and lsat from a crappy school you will beat out a lower gpa and lsat from a good school. The idea that your school matters, unless you are exactly the same in everything else (letters of rec, personal statement, when app was submitted, hardships) is bogus. And honestly, how many people are exactly the same as another applicant?</p>
<p>Pay attention to the question. The poster asks "Will a 3.8 gpa at an Ivy League school mean more to a prospective law school than a 3.8 from, say, George Washington University?"</p>
<p>We're not taking about a high GPA and LSAT from a bad school versus a lower GPA and LSAT from an Ivy. We're taking about students with the same stats from colleges of widely different reputations. You can take the proposition to a logical extreme by insisting that no students are EXACTLY the same (recs, statement, etc.) but that's a poor rhetorical (and logical) move. If you want to be blunt, make sure you're also right.</p>
<p>^Ooo looks like we've got someone who'll do well on the LSAT...</p>
<p>Half the threads on the board are about this, and the answer is no.</p>
<p>cherokeejew-</p>
<p>I don't disagree with you, as I know many people go on to top law schools coming from lackluster UGs. That said, what is the point of enduring the rigor and expense of a top notch UG when one could just opt for a lesser state school?</p>
<p>In Penn's Law school class of 2010, 75 out of 240 students went to Ivy's. I think it matters.</p>
<p>That piece of data is way too limited to draw any conclusions.</p>
<p>The statistics across many of the top law school have been noted here before, and Ivy league (along with other top undergraduate schools) are disproportionately represented in the classes of top law schools. You can search for the threads. In any event, it is unclear whether this disproportionate representation is because these top law schools look to Ivy league (and similar) undergraduate schools as feeders or whether students from Ivy league (and similar) undergraduate schools apply to top law schools in much greater numbers than students from other colleges. I tend to believe that there is a bit of both at play.</p>
<p>chocoman......good luck ont he LSAT...you're logic seems to need some work</p>
<p>It's not so much that people from top schools apply in greater numbers, it's the fact that they have higher LSATs. When controlling for the LSAT, though, the school doesn't matter (except possibly for applying to your alma mater and maybe theoretically for perfectly equal candidates). </p>
<p>What's the reason for going to a top-notch UG? Well, to learn more maybe, and meet people of similar intellect and inclination. Plus, most people aren't sure of their future when going to UG (even if they think they are), and undergrad prestige does matter for other paths. Personally, though, I did just choose the local state school and saved about $140,000.</p>