Top Law Schools

For those of you who transferred into HYS or know of people who did, did you find that you were as competitive as the current students there?
Did you ever feel overwhelmed "intellectually," in terms of achievements, or in terms of academic performance? E.g. big fish in small pond vs. small fish in big pond?

I know that transfers typically do well at their new school as a self-selecting bunch of higher achievers, but does this still hold at schools that already have the top 1% of the 1%?
I'm especially curious to know about those who made a more minor jump, e.g. T-14/T1 to HYS.

This thread has success written all over it

DELG wrote:This thread has success written all over it

OP Here:

Upon re-reading my post, I can see how this topic might devolve into a terrible thread. If so, I apologize because I definitely don't intend for that.

I probably could have phrased things better, but the purpose of my posting was simply to hear about transfer experiences in such a situation.
I think there absolutely is a worry that you might end up at below-median at your new school, and there is a question of whether it is worthwhile to risk giving up your current standing.

Again, don't mean for this to be a inflammatory.

T1 -> HYS transfer here. PM me, OP.

Hard to make this comparison because 1L and 2L are so different. Some 2Ls, transfers included, are out to lunch as soon as they get SA offer. Hard to say if a higher percentage of transfers than normal students feel compelled to keep "competing" because of their "self-selecting high-achieving" status. Also worth noting that: 1) A little bit harder to tell where you actually stand in relation to everyone else with the opaque grading; and 2) Ending up at or below median at HYS might be a better outcome for your long-term goals than staying put.

My grades were roughly similar to those at my T20, but i'd definitely say the in-class discussion is sometimes over my head. To the extent that comments are academic performance, I feel more towards the middle of the pack (they aren't actually measured as academic performance).

Just LOL at an anonymous OP in search of fart huffing.

MagicMike80 wrote:Hard to make this comparison because 1L and 2L are so different. Some 2Ls, transfers included, are out to lunch as soon as they get SA offer. Hard to say if a higher percentage of transfers than normal students feel compelled to keep "competing" because of their "self-selecting high-achieving" status. Also worth noting that: 1) A little bit harder to tell where you actually stand in relation to everyone else with the opaque grading; and 2) Ending up at or below median at HYS might be a better outcome for your long-term goals than staying put.

My grades were roughly similar to those at my T20, but i'd definitely say the in-class discussion is sometimes over my head. To the extent that comments are academic performance, I feel more towards the middle of the pack (they aren't actually measured as academic performance).

OP Here:

Okay, thanks. That is good to know!

Nebby wrote:Just LOL at an anonymous OP in search of fart huffing.

LOL I'm not sure what "fart huffing" means, but I'm gonna go ahead and guess it's something negative

There is a TLS trope, backed up by a number of Harvard LAW SCHOLARS on TLS, that the students at HLS are a compilation of those kids in your undergrad philosophy lecture classes that would raise his or her hand and pose a litany of hypotheticals in order to put on airs of academic superiority and depth, but it was actually just super annoying and contributed zero to the discussion at hand. This act of extreme gooberdom has been dubbed "fart huffing" to insinuate that the only airs being put on by this performance is the smell of their own post-Taco Bell fartfeast. But they do it continuously, so one can only conclude that they enjoy huffing the smell of their own bullshit, thus "fart huffing."

Long-story short: I was poking fun at your question, because it plays into this larger idea that the people at HLS are some sort of ubermensch, instead of a bunch of striver nerds who gamed a broken law school admissions test and largely come from backgrounds of privilege that allow them enough free time in undegrad to pretty easily sail through in the GPA department.

In reality, there are plenty of fucking idiots at all of the T14s, and that there is probably an even higher percentage of them at HLS than other T14s.

sigh, was hoping that everyone would just let this thread die quietly...

OP, I went from a T10 to H. There is no real way you can tell whether or not the students are more intelligent. You can't poll IQs and you can't really judge based on exams, since people sorta check out starting in 2L year (as alluded to by magicmike), so all you can do is go off classroom discussions...and we all know how much these actually tell you about IQ and ability :/ Also, you might be getting ahead of yourself by asking this q, since I doubt transfer apps have even gone out yet

Nebby wrote:In reality, there are plenty of fucking idiots at all of the T14s, and that there is probably an even higher percentage of them at HLS than other T14s.

I agree that there are definitely idiots at HLS (I might be one of them, who knows) and the rest of the T14s, but it's absurd to think there are a higher percentage at HLS than any other T14. Regardless of how UGPA is gamed, the median LSAT for HLS is still tied w/ Yale for highest. And why are you so focused on HLS? People have been talking about HYS, not H in particular.

juzam_djinn wrote:sigh, was hoping that everyone would just let this thread die quietly...

OP, I went from a T10 to H. There is no real way you can tell whether or not the students are more intelligent. You can't poll IQs and you can't really judge based on exams, since people sorta check out starting in 2L year (as alluded to by magicmike), so all you can do is go off classroom discussions...and we all know how much these actually tell you about IQ and ability :/ Also, you might be getting ahead of yourself by asking this q, since I doubt transfer apps have even gone out yet

Nebby wrote:In reality, there are plenty of fucking idiots at all of the T14s, and that there is probably an even higher percentage of them at HLS than other T14s.

I agree that there are definitely idiots at HLS (I might be one of them, who knows) and the rest of the T14s, but it's absurd to think there are a higher percentage at HLS than any other T14. Regardless of how UGPA is gamed, the median LSAT for HLS is still tied w/ Yale for highest. And why are you so focused on HLS? People have been talking about HYS, not H in particular.

Are you stating a claim that higher LSAT correlates to reduced idiot-ratio? If not, then I don't understand your inclusion of LSATs. I was focusing on HLS, because SLS and YLS are fine institutions of higher learning. Actually, it's because I didn't read OP carefully enough, but that's besides the point. I'll go ahead and expand my criticism to HYS for consistency.

Nebby wrote:

juzam_djinn wrote:sigh, was hoping that everyone would just let this thread die quietly...

OP, I went from a T10 to H. There is no real way you can tell whether or not the students are more intelligent. You can't poll IQs and you can't really judge based on exams, since people sorta check out starting in 2L year (as alluded to by magicmike), so all you can do is go off classroom discussions...and we all know how much these actually tell you about IQ and ability :/ Also, you might be getting ahead of yourself by asking this q, since I doubt transfer apps have even gone out yet

Nebby wrote:In reality, there are plenty of fucking idiots at all of the T14s, and that there is probably an even higher percentage of them at HLS than other T14s.

I agree that there are definitely idiots at HLS (I might be one of them, who knows) and the rest of the T14s, but it's absurd to think there are a higher percentage at HLS than any other T14. Regardless of how UGPA is gamed, the median LSAT for HLS is still tied w/ Yale for highest. And why are you so focused on HLS? People have been talking about HYS, not H in particular.

Are you stating a claim that higher LSAT correlates to reduced idiot-ratio? If not, then I don't understand your inclusion of LSATs. I was focusing on HLS, because SLS and YLS are fine institutions of higher learning. Actually, it's because I didn't read OP carefully enough, but that's besides the point. I'll go ahead and expand my criticism to HYS for consistency.

Yeah if anything I've heard the most complaints from friends about their classmates at SLS, for general idiocy/being awful.

Nebby wrote:

juzam_djinn wrote:sigh, was hoping that everyone would just let this thread die quietly...

OP, I went from a T10 to H. There is no real way you can tell whether or not the students are more intelligent. You can't poll IQs and you can't really judge based on exams, since people sorta check out starting in 2L year (as alluded to by magicmike), so all you can do is go off classroom discussions...and we all know how much these actually tell you about IQ and ability :/ Also, you might be getting ahead of yourself by asking this q, since I doubt transfer apps have even gone out yet

Nebby wrote:In reality, there are plenty of fucking idiots at all of the T14s, and that there is probably an even higher percentage of them at HLS than other T14s.

I agree that there are definitely idiots at HLS (I might be one of them, who knows) and the rest of the T14s, but it's absurd to think there are a higher percentage at HLS than any other T14. Regardless of how UGPA is gamed, the median LSAT for HLS is still tied w/ Yale for highest. And why are you so focused on HLS? People have been talking about HYS, not H in particular.

Are you stating a claim that higher LSAT correlates to reduced idiot-ratio? If not, then I don't understand your inclusion of LSATs. I was focusing on HLS, because SLS and YLS are fine institutions of higher learning. Actually, it's because I didn't read OP carefully enough, but that's besides the point. I'll go ahead and expand my criticism to HYS for consistency.

Um, wouldn't it?

Yeah, that obviously is my claim. LSAT's not perfect by any means but it still has SOME correlation to aptitude and diligence. And you're the one who brought up the "broken system" of lsat/ugpa. If your claim is that they are both absolutely useless, then there's just no arguing w/ that type of assertion and the person making it.

But yeah, this thread...I'm going to stop posting in it.

Your average Harvard undergrad has what (can't find the thread with this data), a 164 LSAT or so? I wouldn't say that your average Harvard Law student is any smarter than your average Harvard undergrad.

juzam_djinn wrote:Yeah, that obviously is my claim. LSAT's not perfect by any means but it still has SOME correlation to aptitude and diligence. And you're the one who brought up the "broken system" of lsat/ugpa. If your claim is that they are both absolutely useless, then there's just no arguing w/ that type of assertion and the person making it.

But yeah, this thread...I'm going to stop posting in it.

Pretty bad opinion broski--good decision. One can certainly be an idiot and have a high LSAT.

With regard to whether or not someone is a fart-huffing idiot, a high LSAT may actually increase those chances, not reduce them. JFC are y'all a bunch of runny-nosed slobbering 0Ls or something? (obviously related to the abl and jizzdjinn posters--not you scotti)

Edit: appears juzam is not a 0L

scottidsntknow wrote:Your average Harvard undergrad has what (can't find the thread with this data), a 164 LSAT or so? I wouldn't say that your average Harvard Law student is any smarter than your average Harvard undergrad.

Not all Harvard undergrads take the LSAT. Also, what?

abl wrote:

scottidsntknow wrote:Your average Harvard undergrad has what (can't find the thread with this data), a 164 LSAT or so? I wouldn't say that your average Harvard Law student is any smarter than your average Harvard undergrad.

Not all Harvard undergrads take the LSAT. Also, what?

He's saying that your idea that the LSAT is a good indicator of someone's chance of being a fart-huffer is a bad idea not grounded in fact.

Nebby wrote:

abl wrote:

scottidsntknow wrote:Your average Harvard undergrad has what (can't find the thread with this data), a 164 LSAT or so? I wouldn't say that your average Harvard Law student is any smarter than your average Harvard undergrad.

Not all Harvard undergrads take the LSAT. Also, what?

He's saying that your idea that the LSAT is a good indicator of someone's chance of being a fart-huffer is a bad idea not grounded in fact.

It wasn't my idea. I also don't understand how what the intelligence of the average Harvard undergrad has anything to do with the chances that a top law student is a "far-huffer."

Transfers definitely aren't less intelligent here, a few of them just lack the requisite academic social graces. Most 2Ls/3Ls have their "I'm gonna read ahead and raise my hand to ask six questions a class on tangential topics" bug out of their system, sometimes transfers haven't fully kicked it.. Doesn't mean they're less competent though. They tend to be good students.