Mean LSAT by UG College

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
markymark
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby markymark » Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:27 am

BeastCoastHype wrote:
mallard wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:I suspect that the people who really care about undergrad rank etc. haven't spent much time in the working world. No one gives a shit where you went to college after it's over. Everyone is thrown back into the same bucket, with Harvard grads working alongside (and competing against) Ole Miss grads. WUSTL grads could be 12th or 6th or 35th and no one would treat them differently, and Duke grads will never matter anyway. A diploma can be a nice shiny sticker to put on your wall, but it doesn't impress/matter to anyone with any life experience.


This is not really true in the legal profession, from what I know.


Sure, but law is different from everything else. Even in the legal profession though no one cares about your undergrad degree, only where you went and how you did in law school.


I've heard that undergrad can still matter a lot at the very elite firms.


As to the "working world," where you went to undergrad means everything for getting that first job in elite fields. Blackrock and McKinsey (front office positions) aren't hiring from the University of Iowa.

User avatar
Lawyer2012
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Lawyer2012 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:27 am

Mosca wrote:When I was in the military I took two classes from the University of Phoenix online (before I realized what a joke that school is); the mean LSAT is 143. Do I get a prize for having the lowest LSAT mean? A free ride to Cooley maybe?



Sorry, my UG still "wins", with 55% in the 0-19%ile range...

How the hell do people score that low?...I don't think I could if I tried!

Edit: LSAT mean 141 :roll:
Last edited by Lawyer2012 on Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Kohinoor » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:13 pm

Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--

06132010
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:02 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby 06132010 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:32 pm

Kohinoor wrote:Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--


right, but that's from 06-07, no? this list is from 2008.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby RVP11 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:38 pm

Kohinoor wrote:Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--


It changes according to your grad year.

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Kohinoor » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:54 pm

booyakasha45 wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--


right, but that's from 06-07, no? this list is from 2008.

So you admit to pursuing a vitriolic anti-Dartmouth agenda?

User avatar
BeastCoastHype
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby BeastCoastHype » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:58 pm

markymark wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:
mallard wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:I suspect that the people who really care about undergrad rank etc. haven't spent much time in the working world. No one gives a shit where you went to college after it's over. Everyone is thrown back into the same bucket, with Harvard grads working alongside (and competing against) Ole Miss grads. WUSTL grads could be 12th or 6th or 35th and no one would treat them differently, and Duke grads will never matter anyway. A diploma can be a nice shiny sticker to put on your wall, but it doesn't impress/matter to anyone with any life experience.


This is not really true in the legal profession, from what I know.


Sure, but law is different from everything else. Even in the legal profession though no one cares about your undergrad degree, only where you went and how you did in law school.


I've heard that undergrad can still matter a lot at the very elite firms.


As to the "working world," where you went to undergrad means everything for getting that first job in elite fields. Blackrock and McKinsey (front office positions) aren't hiring from the University of Iowa.


No, look through some elite firm bios and you will see some crazy ass undergrads. There are both associates and partners who went to places that I've never even heard of at most V20 firms. They might be hesitant about people from REALLY obscure schools and places that are known for being absolutely awful, but otherwise it doesn't matter much. They certainly aren't going to bother distinguishing between Duke, WUSTL, Michigan, Rice, NYU, UCLA, Georgetown, USC etc. Once you reach a certain level where a school is nationally well known, the only people who split hairs are those who discuss schools online all day, not regular people.

I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.

Leeroy Jenkins
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:19 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Leeroy Jenkins » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:59 pm

BeastCoastHype wrote:I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.

Of all the people in finance you could have chosen, I'm pretty sure using Dick Fuld as an example undermines the point you were trying to make.

legends159
Posts: 1090
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:12 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby legends159 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:02 pm

Back to OP

Fordham 153

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby RVP11 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:08 pm

Booyakasha,

Gustavus is very much a real college.

User avatar
BeastCoastHype
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby BeastCoastHype » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:11 pm

Lxw wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.

Of all the people in finance you could have chosen, I'm pretty sure using Dick Fuld as an example undermines the point you were trying to make.

Should I have referenced the many Harvard grads on the board who crashed Bear Stearns? Yeah, his firm collapsed, but that's not the issue here. The issue we're discussing is whether or not it's possible to make it to a position at the top of the financial world without an elite degree, and the answer is indisputably yes.

markymark
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby markymark » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:14 pm

BeastCoastHype wrote:No, look through some elite firm bios and you will see some crazy ass undergrads. There are both associates and partners who went to places that I've never even heard of at most V20 firms. They might be hesitant about people from REALLY obscure schools and places that are known for being absolutely awful, but otherwise it doesn't matter much. They certainly aren't going to bother distinguishing between Duke, WUSTL, Michigan, Rice, NYU, UCLA, Georgetown, USC etc. Once you reach a certain level where a school is nationally well known, the only people who split hairs are those who discuss schools online all day, not regular people.

I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.


I don't think it is necessary to have attended a top firm, I just think it is an added "boost" for two reasons:

1. Top undergrads tend to send a lot of kids to top law schools. Top law schools tend to send a lot of kids to to top firms. Hence, you're more likely to have connection with interviewers if you attended Georgetown than if you attended the University of Iowa.

2. Similar to number 1, top firms like to hire kids from top undergrads because these kids will tend to have more in common with clients who are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented in the financial world.


I would say undergraduate reputation is a distant 4th in hiring criteria.

1. Law School attended
2. Grades
3. Work Experience
4. Undergrad

06132010
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:02 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby 06132010 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:19 pm

JSUVA2012 wrote:Booyakasha,

Gustavus is very much a real college.


Haha, the name just sounds made up.

06132010
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:02 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby 06132010 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:20 pm

Kohinoor wrote:
booyakasha45 wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--


right, but that's from 06-07, no? this list is from 2008.

So you admit to pursuing a vitriolic anti-Dartmouth agenda?


You got me.

User avatar
BeastCoastHype
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby BeastCoastHype » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:33 pm

markymark wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:No, look through some elite firm bios and you will see some crazy ass undergrads. There are both associates and partners who went to places that I've never even heard of at most V20 firms. They might be hesitant about people from REALLY obscure schools and places that are known for being absolutely awful, but otherwise it doesn't matter much. They certainly aren't going to bother distinguishing between Duke, WUSTL, Michigan, Rice, NYU, UCLA, Georgetown, USC etc. Once you reach a certain level where a school is nationally well known, the only people who split hairs are those who discuss schools online all day, not regular people.

I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.


I don't think it is necessary to have attended a top firm, I just think it is an added "boost" for two reasons:

1. Top undergrads tend to send a lot of kids to top law schools. Top law schools tend to send a lot of kids to to top firms. Hence, you're more likely to have connection with interviewers if you attended Georgetown than if you attended the University of Iowa.

2. Similar to number 1, top firms like to hire kids from top undergrads because these kids will tend to have more in common with clients who are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented in the financial world.


I would say undergraduate reputation is a distant 4th in hiring criteria.

1. Law School attended
2. Grades
3. Work Experience
4. Undergrad


I'd agree with this. And I think once you reach that fourth criterion, as long as the school meets a certain threshold of notoriety there is little to no distinction in the eyes of hiring partners.

CassieRae
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 5:30 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby CassieRae » Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:59 pm

I'm probably late on this thread, but I thought I'd throw in my school.

FSU squeezed out a 150 mean. I say squeezed like my peers did something amazing, but hey, could be lower!

User avatar
OperaSoprano
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 1:54 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby OperaSoprano » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:18 pm

BeastCoastHype wrote:
markymark wrote:
BeastCoastHype wrote:No, look through some elite firm bios and you will see some crazy ass undergrads. There are both associates and partners who went to places that I've never even heard of at most V20 firms. They might be hesitant about people from REALLY obscure schools and places that are known for being absolutely awful, but otherwise it doesn't matter much. They certainly aren't going to bother distinguishing between Duke, WUSTL, Michigan, Rice, NYU, UCLA, Georgetown, USC etc. Once you reach a certain level where a school is nationally well known, the only people who split hairs are those who discuss schools online all day, not regular people.

I'll agree with your comment regarding first jobs in the working world, but after that it again stops mattering. I have friends at most of the elite financial firms. A lot went to good schools, but some went to places like Nebraska, Penn State, University of Florida etc. Once a career gets moving things get even more mixed up. Dick Fuld, former head of Lehman Brothers, was a Colorado grad I believe. In the end it's job performance and connections that start to make the difference, not the degree on your wall.


I don't think it is necessary to have attended a top firm, I just think it is an added "boost" for two reasons:

1. Top undergrads tend to send a lot of kids to top law schools. Top law schools tend to send a lot of kids to to top firms. Hence, you're more likely to have connection with interviewers if you attended Georgetown than if you attended the University of Iowa.

2. Similar to number 1, top firms like to hire kids from top undergrads because these kids will tend to have more in common with clients who are likely to be disproportionately overrepresented in the financial world.


I would say undergraduate reputation is a distant 4th in hiring criteria.

1. Law School attended
2. Grades
3. Work Experience
4. Undergrad


I'd agree with this. And I think once you reach that fourth criterion, as long as the school meets a certain threshold of notoriety there is little to no distinction in the eyes of hiring partners.


I hope #4 is less true for PI hiring. If not, I am screwed.

I wonder how much my grades will be able to compensate for my UG institution. It is nationally known, though I'm not sure how much that will help in this case.

If I do well at Fordham, someone will hire me, right? I imagine that I will need higher grades to compete, but I'm sure the school would not have admitted me if they thought I would ruin their employment statistics.

User avatar
Marko Ramius
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:37 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Marko Ramius » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:21 pm

BeastCoastHype, trying a bit too hard to out yourself as a TTT product, eh? No V10 for you.

geoanthem
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:32 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby geoanthem » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:24 pm

I do not think Emory is underranked for ug. I transferred from Tulane (157) to Emory (159) and I can tell you, on a whole, the students at Emory were a whole lot smarter than Tulane. This is based on interractions and work ethic. Emory library was always packed, the Tulane library was a ghost town except for exam week.

elbandito26
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby elbandito26 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:33 pm

Pomona College is 165, (it was 166 when I first received my report in January)

User avatar
BeastCoastHype
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby BeastCoastHype » Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:03 pm

Marko Ramius wrote:BeastCoastHype, trying a bit too hard to out yourself as a TTT product, eh? No V10 for you.


I am proudly a TTT product. I turned down a handful of top 10 schools (3 ranked higher than Dook) for my free state school education, and I don't regret it for a minute. Undergrad is all the same basic stuff. It's not like a smart economics major from Dartmouth can explain the Laffer curve better than a smart economics major from the University of Georgia, or a political science major from Harvard has access to some sort of secret knowledge that no one else knows about. The same is true for law school which, for me at least, will be another free degree, this time at Michigan. T14 students aren't gaining any different knowledge than kids at Boston College or Loyola LA. The only reason I care this time around is that the job opportunities are actually demonstrably better for students at top schools. I'm much happier coming out of Michigan as a Darrow Scholar with zero TOTAL debt than spending close to $500,000 on a set of degrees that wouldn't take me any farther in life. I'm pretty sure I'll wind up in exactly the same place after law school as most of the kids who "invested" more money in their educations more than I did.

User avatar
Lawyer2012
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby Lawyer2012 » Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:07 pm

BeastCoastHype wrote:
Marko Ramius wrote:BeastCoastHype, trying a bit too hard to out yourself as a TTT product, eh? No V10 for you.


I am proudly a TTT product. I turned down a handful of top 10 schools (3 ranked higher than Dook) for my free state school education, and I don't regret it for a minute. Undergrad is all the same basic stuff. It's not like a smart economics major from Dartmouth can explain the Laffer curve better than a smart economics major from the University of Georgia, or a political science major from Harvard has access to some sort of secret knowledge that no one else knows about. The same is true for law school which, for me at least, will be another free degree, this time at Michigan. T14 students aren't gaining any different knowledge than kids at Boston College or Loyola LA. The only reason I care this time around is that the job opportunities are actually demonstrably better for students at top schools. I'm much happier coming out of Michigan as a Darrow Scholar with zero TOTAL debt than spending close to $500,000 on a set of degrees that wouldn't take me any farther in life. I'm pretty sure I'll wind up in exactly the same place after law school as most of the kids who "invested" more money in their educations more than I did.


+1 TITCR

airefresco
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby airefresco » Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:16 pm

Hmm! I think we've found a new ranking criterion for U.S. News and World Report! (for undergraduate institutions)
Last edited by airefresco on Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

green
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:19 pm

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby green » Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:21 pm

booyakasha45 wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--


right, but that's from 06-07, no? this list is from 2008.


Yeah, I took it in 2008 and Dartmouth had 163.

geoanthem
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 1:32 am

Re: Mean LSAT by UG College

Postby geoanthem » Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:24 pm

UMiami is a 152, ouch.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 4 guests