Mean LSAT by UG College Forum

[markymark]

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.

[Lawyer2012]

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

[Kohinoor]

Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--

[06132010]

Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--

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

[RVP11]

Dartmouth is 164 not a 163.

--ImageRemoved--

It changes according to your grad year.

[Kohinoor]

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?

[BeastCoastHype]

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]

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]

Back to OP

Fordham 153

[RVP11]

Booyakasha,

Gustavus is very much a real college.

[BeastCoastHype]

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]

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]

Booyakasha,

Gustavus is very much a real college.

Haha, the name just sounds made up.

[06132010]

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.

[BeastCoastHype]

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]

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!

[OperaSoprano]

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.

[Marko Ramius]

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

[geoanthem]

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]

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

[BeastCoastHype]

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.

[Lawyer2012]

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]

Hmm! I think we've found a new ranking criterion for U.S. News and World Report! (for undergraduate institutions)

[green]

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]

UMiami is a 152, ouch.