<p>I'm currently a freshman at UC Berkeley, and I'm seriously considering transferring to the University of Oregon. I know this is not a conventional move and I'm aware that it's a decision that needs to be given a lot of thought, especially since I just started my first semester at school, but I'm going to work out the myriad of personal reasons behind my decision on my own -- so please, don't be judgmental! What I'm really curious about, and all I really want advice on, is whether or not this move (assuming I go through with it) will effect my chances of being admitted to a competitive law school like NYU, Yale or Columbia.</p>
<p>I've been doing a lot of research, and the general consensus seems to be that the prestige of an undergraduate institution does NOT effect one's chances, so long as you have a high GPA and very strong LSAT scores. Would this hold true for a case like mine? I've read lots of posts debating whether or not it's most strategic to attend an "easier" undergraduate school in order to boost one's GPA, and I'm worried that my decision to transfer out of a top-tier public school into a much lower-ranked one will be seen as an effort to get good grades without putting in the work, which is not the case at all. Will the jump from Berkeley to Oregon will come across as an effort to manipulate my numbers, or if nothing else, as an indication that I can't handle the coursework at Cal? (Which is also not the case -- it's still early on, but I've gotten A's on all my papers so far and I've been assigned as a writing tutor in my Anthropology class). </p>
<p>I'm just worried that I'll really stand out among the other applicants, and negatively so, for choosing to leave a top-ranked institution for one that is markedly less prestigious. Do you think this is a valid concern? If so, is there any way for me to make it clear on my application that my decision to transfer was in no way influenced by a desire to manipulate my GPA?</p>
<p>I think I will otherwise be a strong candidate for law school: I work hard, I'm smart (forgive the arrogance), and I'm determined. I'm sure I'll get the grades I need and I'll give the LSAT all I've got, but please let me know how you think this transfer would affect my chances. Thanks :)</p>
<p>“Will the jump from Berkeley to Oregon will come across as an effort to manipulate my numbers, or if nothing else, as an indication that I can’t handle the coursework at Cal?”</p>
<p>Yes. However, law schools will know, but won’t care. That said, college should be more than a springboard onto law school. Besides, your classmates in law school would be quite interested in where you went for undergrad when you are in law school. You get a different reaction if you say “I went to Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Columbia, Berkeley, Penn, etc.” than if you say “I went to Arizona State, Oregon State, Michigan State, etc.” I know that’s not good, but that’s how it is.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that Law school admissions reps are much more savvy about academic rigor at undergrad colleges than their counterparts in undergrad admissions. It is easy to make a balnket statement about where you go tto school does not matter as long a s you get a good GPA and LSAT, but I think the reality presents a differnet picture. It is one thing to look at admissions at a T-14 school and see that there is a large number of colleges represented in the admitted blass. However, when you look at actual students you will have more students at top universities and perhaps 1 to 2 people from poduk u. year over year the largest group of students at Harvard and Yale law went to undergrad at Harvard and Yale. Then it filters down to other top schools with perhaps 1 student from pudunk, east/west podunk u. Does this all happen by accident year over year?</p>
<p>Anna Ivey just recently posted an article:</p>
<p>**Does It Matter Where I Went to College When Law Schools Evaluate My Undergraduate GPA? **</p>
<p>“However, when you look at actual students you will have more students at top universities and perhaps 1 to 2 people from poduk u. year over year the largest group of students at Harvard and Yale law went to undergrad at Harvard and Yale.”</p>
<p>Harvard and Yale law schools give preferences to their own undergrad, which I think is pretty apparent in the data after adjusting for the size of the undergraduate institution. However, I don’t believe a student from Stanford, Princeton, Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia, Penn, or Berkeley has any advantage when it comes to law school admissions unless the applicant is an borderline applicant. The fact that prestigious undergraduate institutions have more of their graduates at top law school can mostly be explained by the LSAT scores achieved by those students.</p>
<p>I have always guessed that this to be the case. The simple fact is that Harvard and Yale selects undergrads based in large part on test-taking ability. (Yes, I know that test scores may not be a selection criteria per se, but they are a easy weed out criteria at the super competitive colleges. A 30/2000 is just another ho-hum applicant.) </p>
<p>Thus, it’s a logical conclusion that H & Y students, on average, will have the highest LSAT (and MCAT) scores. And since LSAT is ~50% of law school admissions…</p>
<p>“However, law schools will know, but won’t care.”</p>
<p>So basically, if my LSAT score and my grades are high enough, leaving Berkeley for Oregon will not be a detriment to my application, despite the fact that it could be viewed as an effort to manipulate my GPA? </p>
<p>I mean, how holistic is this process, really? Do they care at all where/when/if you transfer schools or does it really just come down to the numbers? I feel like leaving a school like Berkeley for one as “easy” as Oregon MUST raise some eyebrows on the admissions board… but that’s just my first instinct. It’s fantastic news for me if I’m completely wrong – it just seems so counterintuitive.</p>
<p>“Besides, your classmates in law school would be quite interested in where you went for undergrad when you are in law school. You get a different reaction if you say “I went to Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Columbia, Berkeley, Penn, etc.” than if you say “I went to Arizona State, Oregon State, Michigan State, etc.” I know that’s not good, but that’s how it is.”</p>
<p>Well that really shoots down the snobby and elitist stereotypes.</p>
<p>I wish I would have known this before I chose what college to attend. If I had known going into an additional 200K of debt would make classmates react differently to me when I said what undergrad I attended, well that would have been well worth it.</p>
<p>Yes, for kwu, Berkeley is not so prestigious. </p>
<p>It’s only a top 8 feeder school to Yale Law and Harvard Law. It’s just the number one feeder school to Berkeley-Boalt Law, and number 2 feeder school to UCLA Law. ;)</p>
<p>“Your classmates won’t give a **** about the prestige of your UG, I can assure you, this guy must be projecting.”</p>
<p>Yes. You probably never went to a top law school if you didn’t know this. The topic is one of the first one that comes up. When you meet someone new at YHS, one of the first few questions asked usually include where did you go to undergrad. Law school is an elitist place. In addition, students from Ivies, Stanford, etc. tend to organize their own special events, doesn’t mean they don’t socialize with other students, but they do spend part of their time building networks for corporate finance and law. When I was in law school, 1L who worked in the finance industry (quite a few from Ivies, Stanford, etc.) organized events through out the year for other students from various top undergraduate institutions, met a few ones from Berkeley, didn’t meet anyone from Oregon, or any other public school with the exception of UVa and UMich.</p>
<p>FWIW, the denominators are not comparable between the universities.
They enroll different proportions of people for whom law school is a likely destination in the first place, and different proportions of people who are remotely smart enough to be accepted to Harvard law school.</p>
<p>MITs law school placement should be viewed as remarkable, IMO, given its proportion of engineers. When it is being compared to schools where most students are studying in the Arts & Sciences college, a more typical path to law school. Only 1/3 of Cornell’s undergrads are studying in its College of Arts & Sciences; most students are studying in other colleges, eg Engineering, Agriculture, Architecture that are likely to produce a comparatively small percentage of future lawyers from the outset, when compared to Arts & sciences colleges at Cornell or at other schools.</p>
<p>Same for other multi-college universities enrolling students with proportionally more non-homogeneous goals.</p>