Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=205021
what?cinephile wrote:retake, seriously.
"So disappointed.Ludovico Technique wrote:I clicked on this thinking it was gonna be about something totally different
alwayssunnyinfl wrote:So disappointed.Ludovico Technique wrote:I clicked on this thinking it was gonna be about something totally different
Far from it, I was wondering how much other students wealthy parents who were legacies would influence their admission into school.A. Nony Mouse wrote:Oh, so you want to know how much it costs to have your family buy your way into law school? I'm sure it can be done but I'd be surprised if there are a lot of people here who can give you advice on that.
Sorry brotha, don't have much money. Most likely will be relying on scholarships to get through school.Flips88 wrote:OP on day 1 of law school: "So, uh, how much did your family give to the school? Mine only gave $1,000,000. Cheap, I know"
Section mates: "
OP: "Don't you people have any money?"
I really don't think this happens often enough to worry about.ConorM wrote:Far from it, I was wondering how much other students wealthy parents who were legacies would influence their admission into school.A. Nony Mouse wrote:Oh, so you want to know how much it costs to have your family buy your way into law school? I'm sure it can be done but I'd be surprised if there are a lot of people here who can give you advice on that.
Oh, sure, but that was part of their whole fudging-the-numbers scandal (my understanding is that "significant" meant "state legislature" - UIUC let in people the state politicos wanted let in in the hopes of getting budget advantages). Not saying other schools don't do the same - just that I don't think it's widespread enough to really make a difference (because it just seems to me it would be too much *work* and require being more organized than a lot of admissions offices are).Crowing wrote:I read the UIUC investigation report and they actually admitted a lot of people just based on phone calls from "significant individuals," whatever that means.
Well what was indicated by the administrative e-mails included in the report anyway was that these admissions due to SI support were the norm before Pless took over. Afterward the got their new dean in 2009 I think Pless and him were in contact about how the SI admits were killing their medians and they essentially stopped admitting people for those reasons. Ofc their goals were absurd anyway and that led to the fake reporting and all that, but the point is the SI admits were pre-scandal era.A. Nony Mouse wrote:Oh, sure, but that was part of their whole fudging-the-numbers scandal (my understanding is that "significant" meant "state legislature" - UIUC let in people the state politicos wanted let in in the hopes of getting budget advantages). Not saying other schools don't do the same - just that I don't think it's widespread enough to really make a difference (because it just seems to me it would be too much *work* and require being more organized than a lot of admissions offices are).Crowing wrote:I read the UIUC investigation report and they actually admitted a lot of people just based on phone calls from "significant individuals," whatever that means.
Even if that's me being naive, and it is widespread, though, it's not like there's anything gained by worrying about it - if that's what an adcomm's looking for and you don't happen to belong to the Rockefeller family, it's not like you can do anything about it.
It seems like admitting questionable candidates in order to get more funding or jobs for recent graduates is much more noble than refusing to to do the same so that you have better rankings.Crowing wrote:Well what was indicated by the administrative e-mails included in the report anyway was that these admissions due to SI support were the norm before Pless took over. Afterward the got their new dean in 2009 I think Pless and him were in contact about how the SI admits were killing their medians and they essentially stopped admitting people for those reasons. Ofc their goals were absurd anyway and that led to the fake reporting and all that, but the point is the SI admits were pre-scandal era.A. Nony Mouse wrote:Oh, sure, but that was part of their whole fudging-the-numbers scandal (my understanding is that "significant" meant "state legislature" - UIUC let in people the state politicos wanted let in in the hopes of getting budget advantages). Not saying other schools don't do the same - just that I don't think it's widespread enough to really make a difference (because it just seems to me it would be too much *work* and require being more organized than a lot of admissions offices are).Crowing wrote:I read the UIUC investigation report and they actually admitted a lot of people just based on phone calls from "significant individuals," whatever that means.
Even if that's me being naive, and it is widespread, though, it's not like there's anything gained by worrying about it - if that's what an adcomm's looking for and you don't happen to belong to the Rockefeller family, it's not like you can do anything about it.