lateral transfer, gw to usc/ucla Forum

[kbai31790]

I was wondering if anyone had any experience with lateral transfers?

Im going to be a 1L at GW but originally from LA, graduated from UCLA.
Want to work in LA in the future.

What would be my chances to transfer from GW to USC or UCLA? GW being at #20, USC at #18 and UCLA at #16?

Thank you!

[Reprisal]

You should probably not transfer to USC or UCLA. Your family and UCLA undergrad connection will do fine to demonstrate to CA firms that you'd like to work in CA.

If you were from Chicago and got into GW, then transferring to USC or UCLA might make sense, maybe. But because you're from CA, you don't have anything to prove.

Berkeley would be worth transferring to, but that's obviously a harder swing.

Best thing I can recommend is to not worry about transferring right now and instead focus on doing the best you can each day during 1L.

[3ThrowAway99]

I think to have a good shot at UCLA you need to be at the very least top 25%. And probably even higher for USC, because they take a tiny transfer class and it can be pretty tough to get in as a transfer. I guess this would be classed as a lateral, but UCLA/USC are stronger schools than GW, and the competition for these schools is often tougher than their rankings suggest IMO.

[3ThrowAway99]

You should probably not transfer to USC or UCLA. Your family and UCLA undergrad connection will do fine to demonstrate to CA firms that you'd like to work in CA.

If you were from Chicago and got into GW, then transferring to USC or UCLA might make sense, maybe. But because you're from CA, you don't have anything to prove.

Berkeley would be worth transferring to, but that's obviously a harder swing.

Best thing I can recommend is to not worry about transferring right now and instead focus on doing the best you can each day during 1L.

Good points, but if OP wants to be in Cali now instead of waiting or really wanted one of these schools in the first place then I think transfer is TCR.

[kbai31790]

Yes but ultimately I want to attend law school or at least finish my other two years in LA.

COL would be cheaper too because i would be able to live at home and I would be able to build connections in the Socal market.

[crossarmant]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

[FlanSolo]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

[CanadianWolf]

Sit out for a year & reapply. Did you apply to UCLA & USC this cycle ?

[kbai31790]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

Yes. I applied to both and was rejected. I don't know how I got into GW with a 3.77/161. So I thought I would take the chance and attend this year.

[crossarmant]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

Yes. I applied to both and was rejected. I don't know how I got into GW with a 3.77/161. So I thought I would take the chance and attend this year.

This is an absolute case of "retake"! With a 3.77 if you up that score by 10 points you're a shoe in for Berkley with money. You'd be out of your goddamn mind to not do so. Take a year off, work hard on your LSAT, and reapply in the spring. You would be doing yourself and your career a major disservice not to.

[Reprisal]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

Yes. I applied to both and was rejected. I don't know how I got into GW with a 3.77/161. So I thought I would take the chance and attend this year.

I took my original score of high 150s to mid 160s with just two months of sustained practice. You've got a year.

Put a deposit down at GW if you haven't already, but buy a couple modern era practice exams (#48 onward) from Amazon and see if you can't surprise yourself with a better practice score before school starts. If you start pulling high 160s consistently in practice, you'll probably be able to do the same in a retaken exam.

I appreciate your "bird in hand" situation, though. If that's all too risky, go to GW. But realize that banking on a transfer is probably more risky than retaking and reapplying.

[DildaMan]

I'm failing to understand why you just DON'T go this year and instead reapply for next year rather than risking a crap shoot with transferring or getting a job out in CA. It wouldn't be significantly harder to get USC/UCLA than GW.

Yes. I applied to both and was rejected. I don't know how I got into GW with a 3.77/161. So I thought I would take the chance and attend this year.

I took my original score of high 150s to mid 160s with just two months of sustained practice. You've got a year.

Put a deposit down at GW if you haven't already, but buy a couple modern era practice exams (#48 onward) from Amazon and see if you can't surprise yourself with a better practice score before school starts. If you start pulling high 160s consistently in practice, you'll probably be able to do the same in a retaken exam.

I appreciate your "bird in hand" situation, though. If that's all too risky, go to GW. But realize that banking on a transfer is probably more risky than retaking and reapplying.

^ Transferring is risky business. Don't attend a law school unless you'd be happy graduating from there.