Should I transfer to a more prestigious undergraduate institution? Forum

[A. Nony Mouse]

I think it's safe to assume Berkeley is more rigorous than Podunk.

That's nice. I think you're wrong, unless you have a very narrow definition of Podunk (but most people who make this comparison don't).

If the median SAT score of incoming Berkeley undergrad is 300 points higher than Podunk U yet they have the same undergrad GPA median, shouldn't we assume the same GPA from Berkeley is more valuable and hard-earned than that from Podunk?

Eta: this is commenting on the "rigor" in its general sense, not commenting on the law school admission process, specifically not an advice to OP. Certifiable derailment.

Why are you assuming that Podunk has such low SAT scores? The only thing anyone has said about Podunk in this thread is that it's not Berkeley. My point is just that name recognition and rigor aren't the same thing. (In fact, I don't actually even think there are any 4-year undergrads with SAT medians that low.)

[jrass]

I think it's safe to assume Berkeley is more rigorous than Podunk.

That's nice. I think you're wrong, unless you have a very narrow definition of Podunk (but most people who make this comparison don't).

If the median SAT score of incoming Berkeley undergrad is 300 points higher than Podunk U yet they have the same undergrad GPA median, shouldn't we assume the same GPA from Berkeley is more valuable and hard-earned than that from Podunk?

Eta: this is commenting on the "rigor" in its general sense, not commenting on the law school admission process, specifically not an advice to OP. Certifiable derailment.

Why are you assuming that Podunk has such low SAT scores? The only thing anyone has said about Podunk in this thread is that it's not Berkeley. My point is just that name recognition and rigor aren't the same thing. (In fact, I don't actually even think there are any 4-year undergrads with SAT medians that low.)

What is the correlation between SAT and college GPA? I know the LSAT one gets heavily debated, but everyone would agree it has some predictive value, at least enough that a casino would have to create odds if one could bet on how students perform. Does the SAT have any predictive value at all?

[ihenry]

I think it's safe to assume Berkeley is more rigorous than Podunk.

That's nice. I think you're wrong, unless you have a very narrow definition of Podunk (but most people who make this comparison don't).

If the median SAT score of incoming Berkeley undergrad is 300 points higher than Podunk U yet they have the same undergrad GPA median, shouldn't we assume the same GPA from Berkeley is more valuable and hard-earned than that from Podunk?

Eta: this is commenting on the "rigor" in its general sense, not commenting on the law school admission process, specifically not an advice to OP. Certifiable derailment.

Why are you assuming that Podunk has such low SAT scores? The only thing anyone has said about Podunk in this thread is that it's not Berkeley. My point is just that name recognition and rigor aren't the same thing. (In fact, I don't actually even think there are any 4-year undergrads with SAT medians that low.)

Here you go: https://www.collegeraptor.com/Rankings/ ... /MedianSAT

Berkeley is only ranked 47th in terms of median SAT scores (2055). It seems all schools beyond top 200 dip 300 points below that (including Syracuse University, which I heard of).

I do agree that rigor is a complicated matter, i.e. majors, course loads, etc. also play a huge part. But there is a difference in competitiveness of schools in general, as demonstrated by their incoming students' quality, hence the difference of value in the same GPA number (assuming same GPA median; but I also doubt it is the case that MIT has 3.7 GPA median yet Podunk has 2.8 GPA median).

[A. Nony Mouse]

Oh, sorry, I was breaking it down by each section - reading/writing/math - not the aggregate score. No, 300 points isn't as big a difference in the aggregate; but then, it's not that big a difference in the aggregate.

I'm willing to say that Berkeley probably has more higher-scoring students than Podunk (again, depending on what on earth "Podunk" means). But rigor is different from selectivity, too.

[twenty 8]

If you’re worrying about needing prestige for a T14, fear not. The school wants three things from you; your money, sterling GPA (regardless of the school) and your high LSAT. That’s the way it works. Quid pro quo.

Although anecdotal, I offer a word of caution. In some cases, if you’re aiming for a white shoe BL firm. some firms favor an applicant whose undergrad was Princeton versus dipsy dumpster U.

[Clearly]

This is all stupid. There's a correct answer. You're getting a good gpa for no debt. Don't change a thing. Period.

[dabigchina]

Transfer so u can get a good job out of undergrad and make lots of money without going to law school.

[jumbo2016]

Wow just gotta say I really enjoyed my hypothetical Podunk University being said over and over again in these comments. Good job defending those podunkians

[03152016]

.

[deant286]

OP, Law schools are obsessed with their rankings (maintaining them, if not moving up) bc most people choose schools strictly based on which is ranked higher.

Rankings are strictly numbers based (GPA + LSAT medians, acceptance rate, etc. etc). The level of prestige of the undegrad from which the admitted students came will not have any effect on the rankings. This means there is no reason for ad coms to care if you went to Penn or Arizona State, as a general rule. They only care about the actual GPA itself.

Sure, if the Penn and Arizona applicants somehow have all of the same numbers and nothing else exists to distinguish one from the other, then the Penn kid likely gets the nod. But, in reality, this is incredibly unlikely to happen and you would still likely get into a peer school so it wouldn't really matter.

Anyone advocating for any other position is being irrational and irresponsible. Don't encourage people to inevitably take on more debt chasing a more prestigious undegrad as this will not help them in any practical way, in terms of law school admissions.

eta: never mind lol, brut up there just said exactly the same thing (but that does strengthen my point tho)