<p>^^ bclintonk
oldforts analysis and conclusion was based on highly erroneous statistics!</p>
<p>-</p>
<p>Wow. I log on and the ad at the top is for Cooley Law School.</p>
<p>Haha, gloworm. Funny that Cooley appears during a discussion of poor employment prospects and fourth tier law schools. :)</p>
<p>If you take a look at some of the forums focused on law school acceptance you will see that GPA and LSAT do reign supreme as people have stated on this thread. The law school will prefer a 4.0 GPA with a 170+ LSAT from just about any school than a 3.2 engineer from MIT. Crazy as that seems, it is how things seem to play out. Now, if they are choosing between 2 applicants each with 174 LSAT and 3.6 GPA one from Harvard and the other from a smaller less regarded college, the Harvard applicant might have an edge. But it really does seem that GPA and LSAT are what they care about, major and undergrad school don’t play much of a part in their decisions.</p>
<p>^My impression is that if two applicants had the same LSAT score (say 175), and one has a 3.6 in engineering at MIT and the other has a 3.75 at some random state school, they’ll take the 3.75 GPA person.</p>
<p>^ ^
They would! Those medians gotta be maintained! ;)</p>
<p>I got the stats from one of the old posts on the law forum. The link no longer exists because it was from 2007 (when it was published). When I looked at it, it was from Harvard´s class profile, and Yale published something similar. What I gather is that they no longer publish number of students from each college, they only publish names of colleges now. I wouldn´t jump into conclusion that the data was erroneous. </p>
<p>bclintonk - all the what ifs could all contribute to why more H students applied to HLS, but all of those what ifs could just be that. The data we need to see is how many students from each of those schools apply to HLS (or any of top LS) and how many get admitted.</p>
<p>Grads just doing what they so expensively paid to learn how to do. (Manipulate law to ones advantage.)</p>
<p>Suing an “Off-Limit” target seems to be the defendants only argument here.</p>
<p>“I wouldn´t jump into conclusion that the data was erroneous.” </p>
<p>Oh for goodness sakes! In 5 years Harvard goes from accepting its entire law school class from only 13 colleges to over 148 colleges??? in 5 years? right…
And you believe what posters on a forum say over what a college publishes?
You dont think its possible that posters on the law school forums might sometimes exaggerate where they were accepted, but always tell the truth ??</p>
<p>^Well, the schools have already been proven dishonest, so yeah. On the forum I was talking about the applicants are going through the process school by school so while they could lie, the majority are pretty up front about the status of their cycles. Also, the acceptances or WL’s or Dings come out all in batches and it is pretty easy to see who is included in each.</p>
<p>“Well, “the” schools have already been proven dishonest.”!</p>
<p>THE schools? as in “if one school lies then ALL schools Lie”? Proof? or simply more conjecture from a frustrated applicant?</p>
<p>I’m done with this silly argument.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK change “THE” to more than one so far, and more seem to be creeping up. So to say that I don’t believe the schools stats on anything carte blanche doesn’t seem to be unreasonable. And as far as frustrated applicant? Not in this house. If you really want to dig through all of my posts knock yourself out. The fact that DD will be going to Law School, and will be basing her choice on some of those stats is a little scarey.</p>
<p>
No I don’t believe everything I read on CC, just like I do not believe you necessary know what you are talking about. Is your kid in a law school? Do you know anything about law school admission? Oh, but wait, you were the one who couldn’t even get the admission rate correct because you didn’t know what should be in the denominator when you are calculation a rate. Would you like me to dig up the post when a college student was asking you what the heck you were talking about?</p>
<p>I’d say the stats provided by many, maybe most, schools are misleading.</p>
<p>Oldfort - I believe you posted a document that Harvard used to post about the top college alma maters for its current students (1Ls, 2Ls, and 3Ls) or for the past 5 years (or something to that effect). I remember those lists. It no longer posts that information publicly.</p>
<p>You may also find interesting an article in the Wall Street Journal from 2003 - “Want to Go to Harvard Law?” WSJ sourced alma mater information for students at fifteen elite law schools, medical schools, and business schools and ranked undergraduate institutions this way in terms of being “feeder” for these professional schools:</p>
<p>Top Ten Elite Professional School Feeder Schools
- Harvard
- Yale
- Princeton
- Stanford
- Williams
- Duke
- Dartmouth
- MIT
- Amherst
- Swarthmore</p>
<p>Their methodology: *Traditionally, college rankings have focused on test scores and grade averages of kids coming in the door. But we wanted to find out what happens after they leave – and try to get into prestigious grad schools.</p>
<p>We focused on 15 elite schools, five each from medicine, law and business, to serve as our benchmark for profiling where the students came from. Opinions vary, of course, but our list reflects a consensus of grad-school deans we interviewed, top recruiters and published grad-school rankings (including the Journal’s own MBA rankings). So for medicine, our schools were Columbia; Harvard; Johns Hopkins; the University of California, San Francisco; and Yale, while our MBA programs were Chicago; Dartmouth’s Tuck School; Harvard; MIT’s Sloan School; and Penn’s Wharton School. In law, we looked at Chicago; Columbia; Harvard; Michigan; and Yale.</p>
<p>Our team of reporters fanned out to these schools to find the alma maters for every student starting this fall, more than 5,100 in all. Nine of the schools gave us their own lists, but for the rest we relied mainly on “face book” directories schools give incoming students. Of course, when it comes to “feeding” grad schools, a college’s rate is more important than the raw numbers. (Michigan, for example, sent about twice the number as Georgetown, but it’s also more than three times the size.) So our feeder score factors in class size.</p>
<p>How did colleges react to our list? Some were quick to point out that it was only one year of data, and many said they didn’t track their feeder rates closely. “I have no way of verifying this,” a spokesman for Cornell said. Others said they didn’t think this was an important way to judge schools because so many factors play into grad schools’ decisions. Still, the colleges in our list did not dispute our findings and neither did the grad schools.</p>
<p>Not that they necessarily want it out there. “We keep a lid on this data,” says Mohan Boodram, director of admissions and financial aid at Harvard Medical School. Otherwise, “high-school students will think they have to go to certain schools.”*</p>
<p>Source: [Want</a> to Go to Harvard Law? - WSJ.com](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB106453459428307800-search,00.html]Want”>http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB106453459428307800-search,00.html)</p>
<p>The real question should be, what is the job placement rate out of all of these law schools. Getting in is one thing, getting a job so you can pay off your student loans is really what is at issue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, CC is full of people who would give more credence to what “posters on a forum say” than to juried, published research.</p>
<p>So why should oldfort not follow right along in that grand tradition?</p>
<p>I am sure that the law schools that are being sued, are not being defended by their own graduates. These schools have probably hired expensive white shoe type law firms staffed with graduates from the elite schools to ensure that they get the best representation that money can buy -:)</p>
<p>^^^ LOL mazewanderer</p>