Boost for Top Undergrad School?? Forum

[Lavitz]

Well, if Im an employer, and I had to decide between two students with similar grades in law school, I might take their UG into account. Maybe admission counselors figure that your UG institution could possibly improve your job prospects later on, especially if one does not want to work at a law firm after getting a JD. Sure, this consideration might be taken into account in a few number of situations, but I think it's plausible to think that admission counselors might take it into consideration .

I agree Undergrad will have an impact for employers/OCI (as would anything on your resume..), but adcoms are NOT law firms or hiring partners/judges, and the logical jump that schools would accept the most employable candidates is fallacious so long as USNWR privileges UGPA/LSAT over employment data. So that fact and analogy tells nothing really

He never said that schools would look to accept the most employable candidates out of the entire applicant pool, but that it would be treated basically as an extra soft factor to consider in certain situations--like in comparing similar candidates. I think that's reasonable.

[ms9]

Really? I think it's easier to graduate cum laude from a smaller and less recognized small than from a top 25 school, and I would think that that would be pretty obvious to admission counselors, IMO.

This assumes they care about what's harder or easier or more prestigious or any of that. It's (almost exclusively) about the stats.

I wish we could get an admission counselor to weigh, where's Mike Spivey at?

Mike is at a wedding and mostly off the grid, but I, Carlos Danger will attempt to answer under mikes name.

Yes, some schools not only have a reputation based on past experience and data for having strict grading curves/no inflation, but you also get a report as an admissions officer that shows where you stand versus your classmates with your gpa. Notable schools off the top of my head are the United States Service academies and Princeton. From my perspective, applicants from these schools would get a bump.

ALSO, for schools with faculty admissions committees elite undergraduate schools get more of a bump than from schools without faculty admissions committees.

All of this said, there are only a limited number of schools with both the reputation and lack of known grade inflation to help. For the majority what matters is the GPA in a LSAC computed vacuum.

[Motivator9]

Really? I think it's easier to graduate cum laude from a smaller and less recognized small than from a top 25 school, and I would think that that would be pretty obvious to admission counselors, IMO.

This assumes they care about what's harder or easier or more prestigious or any of that. It's (almost exclusively) about the stats.

I wish we could get an admission counselor to weigh, where's Mike Spivey at?

Mike is at a wedding and mostly off the grid, but I, Carlos Danger will attempt to answer under mikes name.

Yes, some schools not only have a reputation based on past experience and data for having strict grading curves/no inflation, but you also get a report as an admissions officer that shows where you stand versus your classmates with your gpa. Notable schools off the top of my head are the United States Service academies and Princeton. From my perspective, applicants from these schools would get a bump.

ALSO, for schools with faculty admissions committees elite undergraduate schools get more of a bump than from schools without faculty admissions committees.

All of this said, there are only a limited number of schools with both the reputation and lack of known grade inflation to help. For the majority what matters is the GPA in a LSAC computed vacuum.

Thanks for weighing in.

[ms9]

I wish we could get an admission counselor to weigh, where's Mike Spivey at?[/quote]

Thanks for weighing in.[/quote]

My pleasure! I just found and tweeted a research article that covers some of this topic, fyi. Hope it helps!

https://twitter.com/SpiveyConsult