<p>Transfer is not a good idea because going to Ivies, Stanford, MIT, etc. would mean you would have to compete with prospective investment bankers for a high GPA, which is not an easy competition by any standard even if you work super hard.</p>
<p>Just get a high LSAT (172+) and high GPA (3.9+) at your school and your application to UChicago and Duke Law would be in very good shape (almost sure thing imo). Yale is hard for anyone from any school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>a) The transfer wouldn’t have to go to such a school. A simple, well known state school would suffice, or a place like NYU.
b) That’s a pretty bizarre judgment to make, considering the fact that many of the above schools take a significant number of transfers every year, and those students perform extremely well. At my top private, the last two years’ valedictorians were transfers. I myself transferred, and I graduated summa, so please don’t post such nonsense.
c) Prospective ibankers never really gunned for a high GPA. All of my friends who got Goldman didn’t have above a 3.6. You needed at least a 3.7 at my school to get magna, and a 3.7 was roughly the top quarter of the class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, and with one point more, OP would have a great shot at Harvard. Your point is not at all anything new with respect to stuff already mentioned.</p>
<p>flowerhead - I was the first one to mention the exclusive importance of both LSAT and GPA on this thread.
Yes, I never said it’s not possible to get high GPA after transferring. I know one of Dartmouth’s valedictorians last year was a transfer from Tufts, and he’s now at Harvard Law. However, he majored in History or English or something, so he wasn’t directly competing with the econ majors who strives for high GPA. I think you are really doing the OP a disfavor by creating the illusion that econ majors at the Ivies, Stanford, MIT don’t compete fiercely for high GPA to get into Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JPM, etc. today. Things now are much different compared to two or three years ago, when top banks were throwing out offers like candies during parades. No body now is getting offers with 3.6. I know elite banks today grants interviews and offers almost exclusively based on GPA (over 3.8) in today’s economy, forcing econ majors to compete fiercely.</p>
<p>My point still remains: OP need not transfer to an Ivy, and you don’t know how the OP would stand up against economics majors at such schools. Moreover, my 3.6 friends are all from the most recent graduating class. </p>
<p>And no, I’m not creating the illusion that economics majors don’t compete fiercely. I don’t see where I did that in my previous post.</p>
<p>It may actually be easier to get into top law schools without attending an competitive prestigious university. Kind how people can get into Ivies for college without attending Exeter or Stuyvesant; attending Exeter or Stuy would just make you work hard for an extra four years compared to ones who went to little known public schools.</p>
<p>I don’t know how the OP would compete, but avoiding competition that has no benefits to the OP at all is wise in any case.</p>
<p>You stated “Prospective ibankers never really gunned for a high GPA” and “I’m not creating the illusion that economics majors don’t compete fiercely.” Most econ majors are prospective ibankers, if they are not gunning for high GPA, then what else are they competing for? Maybe the people you mentioned who got offers from Goldman are ones who got tech or wealth management, not the ones who aim for m&a that defines the “fierce” in fierce competition. Not to mention GS or MS, 3.6 won’t even get anyone an offer from UBS or JPM this days.</p>
<p>Since the OP isn’t looking for a job right after college, transferring to a state flagship has no net benefit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like I said, it puts a good name on the resume and provides access to prestigious summer internships and other fellowship opportunities that would make the OP more competitive at Yale, since that’s his dream. </p>
<p>OP mentioned in the earlier post (if you read it) that he’ll just do his best where he is and see if YLS pans out. Why not transfer to a more competitive institution, with better opportunities with which to distinguish yourself? At the end of the day, Yale would still be a long shot, but if OP is focused on positioning himself such that he has the best possible application he can put forward, transferring up is his best bet.</p>
<p>flowerhead - you are placing excessive importance on where an applicant attends for undergrad. Attending gtown worked out (or maybe didn’t work out) for your goals doesn’t equate to attending a “more prestigious” would work out for the OP. The fact that you went to a top private doesn’t give you the right or credibility to make inferences about how undergrads at small less known schools are viewed. It’s quite possible the smartest person at OP’s school is just as smart and capable as smartest undergrads at yours.
In the end, it mostly comes down to numbers, even at Yale Law and Stanford Law. Prestigious summer internships at Davis Polk or Goldman won’t do much other than push up an applicant whose numbers places him or her at the edge, and there’s no reason at all to assume the op is at a disadvantage for fellowships.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really. I just think you can’t read. I think prestigious undergraduate schools provide a minor boost for the sake of law school admissions; and they do provide a substantive boost for admissions at schools like YLS and SLS. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never implied this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, but no, not really. YLS and SLS are the traditional law school “black boxes.” Here, I am staking my credibility on my experience with the admissions process (and having gotten into SLS); compared to some college student who, from what I can tell, has no experience, I think my credibility probably is higher.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I completely agree… in the grand scheme of things. You seem to have trouble comprehending the fact that my advice is merely attuned toward putting one’s best foot forward for consideration at YLS. Clearly, having a good GPA and LSAT, attending a prestigious undergraduate school, having substantive work experience, and having a prestigious fellowship under your belt make one a perfect candidate (well… as perfect as one can be for YLS).</p>
<p>IvyPBear, I am adding you to the list of people who, I believe, consistently provide inaccurate advice on this forum. While I think many here engage in this practice, the innocuousness of it derives from their making clear that their statements are that of opinion. Your statements, which are clearly misinformed opinions, are masquerading as facts, and are thus the most insidious. The OP would do well not to heed your “advice,” and also to browse forums that are more related to law school admissions (top-law-schools.com), where I’m sure my advice will be verified and substantiated.</p>
<p>That is all.</p>
<p>I graduated from an Ivy law school and practiced law for 25 years. Please heed my advice:</p>
<p>It is absolutely ridiculous for someone who hasn’t even started college yet to focus on law school. You have no idea what law school or the practice of law entail, and you have no idea what will interest you four years from now–you’re still growing up. Your job now is to make the most of the next four years, not to see them as a mere pathway to law school. Enjoy the opportunity to explore a variety of academic and non-academic pursuits. Find a major you love. Work hard, play hard, forge personal relationships, expand your horizons, learn to know thyself. Then you will have prepared yourself in the best possible way for whatever comes after graduation. And if you think you still want to go to law school three years from now, come back, and we’ll talk.</p>
<p>The best advice one can give to an incoming freshman who wants to go to law school is to pick the easiest major on campus and get as close to a 4.0 in it as possible.</p>