<p>Do California residents receive preference in law school admissions at UCLA? I saw on their website that nearly 3/4 of the incoming first-year class are California residents and was just wondering whether this was because they were given preference or if this was due to other factors (in-state tuition, etc...) I am going into my Junior year in college right now with a 3.86, and with UCLA being my top choice for law school when I graduate (which will actually be in just over a year now as I am ahead in credits), I am interested in finding out how not being a California resident will effect my chances of admittance there. Also, if anybody could give me some tips regarding how I could increase my chances at UCLA I would greatly appreciate it. Do they look at anything specifically besides GPA and LSAT scores more so than other law schools (ie Northwestern and work experience, etc.). Also, assuming I am able to maintain my GPA at its current level (3.8-3.85), what LSAT score should I be shooting for? High 160's?</p>
<p>3.8-3.85, a 166-167 should be good enough to get you in, but shoot for upper 160's just to be safe. your gpa is well above their average of around 3.67. there average lsat is around 167. best of luck!</p>
<p>UCB, at least, claims not to demonstrate an in-state preference in the admissions process.</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, how much more difficult is it to get into UCB than UCLA? It appears that their median LSAT scores and GPA's are very similar.. Also, what are the strengths of each? Why would somebody choose UCB over UCLA and vise versa (disregarding external factors such as city, weather, etc.)?</p>
<p>Im pretty sure 90% of people who get accepted to both schools would choose Boalt over UCLA (with the possible exception of people who ONLY want to work in LA). </p>
<p>Boalt is simply a much more well-regarded school than UCLA (although both are exceptional schools)</p>
<p>Any other thoughts?</p>
<p>I don't know enough about the differences between the two schools to weigh in too heavily, but ab_med really covered the big one. The general (not-saying-I-agree-just-saying-that-it's-common) rule of thumb for choosing law school is "Go with the highest-ranked one that lets you in" (occasional "close calls outweighed by major scholarships or other factors" aside). Berkeley is ranked higher than UCLA. They both make practicing in CA easy. Their costs will be comparable. To many prospective students, little else matters (which certainly isn't to suggest that there AREN'T other very valid reasons for choosing either one or the other school).</p>
<p>As I recall, UCB is ranked (by Princeton Review, so take it with some salt) third or fourth "Toughest to Get Into," but UCLA isn't in the top 10. In this case, I don't think that the ranking has as much to do with average stats as it does with predictability. My assumption is that UCB is more likely to turn down an above-average applicant than UCLA is, even though both supposedly use a holistic method of evaluation (especially at this point in time, as UCLA might be clawing to break T14). So, as for how much more difficult it is to get into UCB than UCLA, I think it really depends on who you are. If you have very high stats but little else to offer, it's probably far more difficult to get into Berkeley than UCLA. If you have closer to average stats but a LOT else to offer, it's actually probably easier to get into Berkeley. Just my own guesses.</p>