Prestige of Undergrad vs. GPA

<p>
[quote]
I think people are missing out on the fact that if you are going to a top school, you likely are getting a better education than someone as a not-as-good school. It is no coincidence that many famous scientists, lawyers, and doctors went to very good schools for both undergraduate and graduate school. Schools would not be prestigious if there was no corrolation between success and school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Correlation does not equal causation. Have you considered that people who are accepted to top schools are typically very intelligent in the first place? </p>

<p>Famous scientists, lawyers, and doctors also read the Economist. Gee, the economist must make you really smart!</p>

<p>That's not to say the resources of a good university mean nothing, just that I wouldn't make the connection between success and prestige so casually. </p>

<p>Also; you might want to do some fact checking on the claim that most (which is what you imply when you say "many", because otherwise your point is moot) famous scientists, doctors, and lawyers went to very good undergrad schools. But that argument has been hashed out elsewhere.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If memory serves, Boalt did this based on a regression (possibly an informal one) to predicted Boalt grades. If Harvard undergrads with 3.8's did better at Boalt than CSU undergrads with 3.8's, then Harvard GPAs got a bonus during future admissions processes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But in most cases we're not comparing a school to Harvard; that seems to be an extraordinary case. it's more often a comparison between competitive school and slightly-more-competitive school.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Pft, maybe I should transfer to East Asian Studies or International Relations. Screw Econ. I'm gonna go for a 4.0 in an easier program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They could be pretty hard, depending on your school.</p>

<p>take some experimental stuff if you can maintain 3.5, past that its all LSAT</p>

<p>Also, don't count on getting a better gpa at a school just because it is not as "prestigious" a school. You will still need to work hard and compete hard to get top grades at any school.</p>

<p>I'll weigh in again. </p>

<p>I don't think all law schools use exactly the same methodology for admitting students. I do think the quality of undergrad matters--but that is a hotly debated subject. Personally, I think how much the quality of your UG matters varies by law school. </p>

<p>I do think you can go to a CC and on to a top LS. I've already posted that. But note that in my example, the student transferred to Harvard and got a 4.0 at Harvard as well. </p>

<p>As for Swarthmore, its stats show that in the 2006 cycle, 59 out of 69 applicants from Swat to LS were admitted. 58 of those 69 were alums, i.e., had taken at least one year between college and ls. 23% of poli sci majors at Swat go to law school; 16% of history majors; 13% of philosophy majors; 8% of German majors and 7% of English majors. </p>

<p>I also note that Swat has a pre-law adviser.</p>

<p>All info from Swat's website.</p>

<p>I just spoke with an admissions officer for the law school that I attended. Here is what he noted:</p>

<p>Law school for the most part is a numbers game with LSAT and GPA approximating about 80% of the formula. Essentially the GPA is given a multiplier and the LSAT is added in to give a total score. However, other factor kick in to change the equation abit. For example, if you are an URM, you might get a few points added to your score. In addition, law schools like having a variety of majors represented. For example, if very few accounting or engineering students apply, they might give a preference to some of the rarer majors.</p>

<p>Can you apply to Law School your Junior year or does it have to be your Senior year? If you are able to apply Junior year then does that mean that Law Schools only consider the first 3 years of college rather than 4 years if you applied senior year?</p>

<p>As a lawyer who graduated from a good state law school but not a top law school, I can only say YES it does matter where you graduate from and how high your GPA is. If you are not in the top 10% of your law school class, a lot of jobs will be closed to you, especially at the big law firms. Also, if you did not graduate from a prestigious law school, you are out of luck for a lot of jobs. Twenty years later, I am still being asked for my law school transcript, even though I have very significant legal experience. Go to the best and most prestigious law school and undergraduate school you can and get the best grades you can. Don't trade down thinking it will help you. It won't.</p>

<p>I've been practicing 30+ years, and thought the quality of my work was well known. I've handled very high-profile large projects and complex transactions in my industry. I've always had stellar reviews and double digit raises, working in-house for the leading companies in my industry. I have great relationships with my management team, and often receive job offers when a manager moves to another company. </p>

<p>It didn't occur to me that anyone would care where I went to law school anymore (a 4th tier school, for personal reasons related to the location of the school). Surprise -- this week I was asked where I went to law school by another lawyer, in connection with a recruiting attempt. I guess it's a good thing I'm happy with my current position.</p>

<p>In some contexts, I guess this stuff has the potential to matter forever.</p>

<p>so going to emory, #17 in the country, shouldn't inhibit me in any way from getting into a top 5 law school? (i know, i realize these questions are rather pointless, but the reassurance would be nice)</p>

<p>no it wont inhibit you, but it also won't mean you'll get into a top school either</p>

<p>so in other words, it's based on merit (lsat, gpa) just like it would be at any other university? in other words, if i'm up against someone in a T5 UG school, with similar statistics, will they likely get in over me at the top top law schools?</p>

<p>doctorjohn, you are obsessing and nothing good will come of it. Enjoy your time at Emory - do the best you can and try not to season everything you do with thoughts of law school admission. Don't forget - "when you come to a fork in the road, take it."</p>

<p>DJD - not at all. think of all the HYP/Ivy League/Stanford &c undergrads in front of you in line for those places at top law schools. sorry, you're not going to get bonus prestige points. </p>

<p>the only way you're going to get into a great law school is a sick GPA, as in 3.7+. there are, as always, various extenuating factors (URM-ness is, as always, No.1), but for you average Joe's out there, GPA and LSAT are what will write your ticket. period. </p>

<p>the only way you are going to maintain a sick GPA is to work your butt off. in all honesty it does make college life hella unpleasant, unless i guess you're a wunderkind. you constantly have an 800-pound GPA gorilla riding on your back when you'd rather be out smoking reefer on Foss Hill instead. you can't afford to skip classes, you can't afford to let any assignment come back as less than a 'B' (even then you have to get an A+ on the next one to ensure your average in the class stays above 90%). the simple reality is that you are going to have to work harder and stay more motivated than your peers. </p>

<p>the kind of person trying to be competitive for admission to a top law school is not going to screw around and take a bunch of music classes to make up for the GPA-squashing rigor of their Econ or Polisci or even hard science (dubious...) major. they're going to be maxing out their intellectual capabilities and they're going to catch their second wind within the scrum. they're not kicking back with a schedule half filled with gut classes. if you feel the need to do that, you're not cut out for law school. if you can't handle the pressure at this low level, you've not a chance of thriving later.</p>

<p>"shouldn't inhibit me in any way from getting into a top 5 law school?"</p>

<p>oh holla. never mind.</p>

<p>^ Hey dude. Music is no easier than Econ or political science. In fact, Music requires more work than such majors because of the time students must spend practicing piano, their various instruments, ear training, and score reading. Such slights are really offensive and demonstrate some serious ignorance.</p>

<p>yeah krongman, you obviously don't know much about the rigors of studying music.</p>

<p>how could i forget - music is the #1 preparatory major for law school. whoops. guess i'll just recalibrate my plans.</p>

<p>
[quote]
take a bunch of music classes to make up for the GPA-squashing rigor of their Econ or Polisci or even hard science

[/quote]
</p>

<p>yeah, except your point was that Music was considerably easier.</p>

<p>While it is true that proficiency in both technical and musical dimensions require a much greater time commitment than say Econ, the grading is vastly easier. Sure harmonic dictation, enharmonic modulation analysis, and sight-singing can be difficult, but 70% of the class makes As whether or not you can accurately identify the bass line of a choral anecdote. Bottom line: not difficult to score high and not good for law school preparation by any means.</p>