Sure, there is a stigma. But isn't it safe to say that this particular stigma rests within the segment of the population who are elitists, and very concerned with prestige? I mean, if it's an admissions officer who is wanting the best possible and most diverse law school class, why wouldn't he be holistic in evaluating each applicant's application? And I'm not one of those types who sits on the computer 12/7 and plays WoW. I consider myself to be engaged and active in extra-curricular softs.online schools have a degree of sketcheyness to them. while subconscious, think if you had to choose between an entry level kid from the University of Cali or an entry level kid from no-name online school. at least, if I was doing the hiring, I would always choose the UC kid just cause how do I know the online kid didn't jack-off and play WoW all day long for four years? subconsciously there is a negative stigma attached to online schools and that is reflected in kids from online schools having worse results then would otherwise be expected in the t14 (outside of the t20 most schools are just competing for rankings).
Can you elaborate on what you "saw" last cycle in regards to online schools hurting one's chances? I just want more evidence that online schools really pose harm for a UG online applicant when compared to a UG brick and mortar applicant.based on what i saw last cycle, online schools diminish your chances more than you think but you can still get into top schools.
