Does undergrad really not matter?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
hdunlop
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:14 pm

Re: Does undergrad really not matter?

Postby hdunlop » Sun May 31, 2015 5:16 pm

This may have been covered but the other thing is that I'm sure it matters significantly more if you're straight through than if you've been out a while. I think my nowhere u undergrad would have been more detrimental if I didn't have significant (let alone any) work experience.

Paul Campos
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:44 am

Re: Does undergrad really not matter?

Postby Paul Campos » Sun May 31, 2015 5:47 pm

Inflated grade curves now ensure that it's impossible to flunk out of any top 50 law school (and certainly any top 14 school), as long as the student shows up for exams and makes an effort to answer the questions. Top 50 schools collectively average about one academic dismissal per year, and almost all of these are for cheating or some other non-grade-related reason.

While the perceived quality of an applicant's undergrad may make a tiny difference at the margin (after all law schools are filled to the rafters with credential snobbery), how it does so can run in both directions: personally, when I've been on adcoms I'll tend to be more impressed by somebody with a 170 who went to a CC and then a directional state school than 170s from St. Grottlesex/Ivy alums, who are of course a dime a dozen for all the predictable reasons.

User avatar
haus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 11:07 am

Re: Does undergrad really not matter?

Postby haus » Sun May 31, 2015 5:52 pm

Paul Campos wrote:Inflated grade curves now ensure that it's impossible to flunk out of any top 50 law school (and certainly any top 14 school), as long as the student shows up for exams and makes an effort to answer the questions. Top 50 schools collectively average about one academic dismissal per year, and almost all of these are for cheating or some other non-grade-related reason.

While the perceived quality of an applicant's undergrad may make a tiny difference at the margin (after all law schools are filled to the rafters with credential snobbery), how it does so can run in both directions: personally, when I've been on adcoms I'll tend to be more impressed by somebody with a 170 who went to a CC and then a directional state school than 170s from St. Grottlesex/Ivy alums, who are of course a dime a dozen for all the predictable reasons.

Thanks for chiming in Professor.

Although I fear that at least on person here will view your initial statement about it being impossible to flunk out as a challenge.

:)




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], MSNbot Media, Nobiggie, Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests