snob appeal of your undergraduate institution Forum

[09042014]

I'll say this because there is no Princeton Law School. I have several friends that went to Princeton for undergrad. I did not. Here's what they told me about their undergraduate experience: Sure, there were a select few truly brilliant, bright kids. Most were not of this kind. Most came from somewhat privileged to extremely privileged backgrounds and once away from home did a MOUNTAIN of drugs throughout their 4, sometimes 5 years. They got through it because, from what I was told, it wasn't that intensive from an academic point of view and there were several more fluffy majors to choose from. It's not all vigorous scholarship, class and decorum in those IVY leagues, you know.

Here's what I think about a poor kid who went to a state or no-name college and pulled a 3.7-4.0.... they're hungry. Add a high LSAT to that and you tell me if the "snob appeal" of your undergraduate institution would still matter.

It is hard for me to understand why people so clearly unable to reason well want to go to law school.

You think an Ivy League education is fluff because your princeton friends told you so? I would imagine they were telling you that so that you would not feel inferior. So what you should have learned from this is that you have nice friends not that ivy leauge schools are easy, which is clearly untrue.

A GPA from an ivy league school is going to have a greater weight than a similar gpa from an easier school. Every T-14 admission officer will tell you that when they see a 3.5 from Ohio State and a 3.5 from Harvard, they believe in the very least (ignoring any assumptions of intelligence) that the Harvard student worked harder.

No need to call me out on being an ivy leauge student. I admit that, but that does not prevent my point from being unbiased.

With the amount of grade inflation going on in the ivy league, I'm not so sure all the ivies are harder than the top public schools. The mean GPA at Harvard is 3.45, Cornell is 3.36, Columbia is 3.42. lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Private schools on average, are .3 higher than public schools.

There is already a boost built in. A significant one.

I'm not sure about what happens in the northeast, but in my high school in the richer area of the Chicago suburbs, almost no one even applied to Ivy league schools. Most of the top of the class went to a flagship state school. The one girl, in my year, who went to Cornell, was lower ranked than me, and was in none of the AP classes.

While I don't doubt the average ivy league student is better than the top public schools, it's not a night at day difference.

And I'll put the graduating class at UIUC electrical engineering against any class in the country. Ok well MIT is probably better.

[09042014]

We can debate grade inflation, program difficulty, and work ethic all day. Bottom line: snob appeal matters-not in call cases but in most.

edit: And sometimes it doesn't even matter if you're smart-telling a client that Kate from (insert fancy school here) is going to be handling you case, over John from ACME State, sounds way more reassuring. We're a brand-name conscious society.

We are talking about law school admissions, and its not so clear it makes a difference at most law schools. I see evidence Penn does value ivy education.

[prezidentv8]

I see evidence Penn does value ivy education.

Ah, THAT explains the waitlist!

[PDaddy]

I don't believe that for a minute. If two people have the same scores and one is from a no name college and one is from a top LAC or university I think hands down the person with the better name school wins.

Approximately .8%

The LSAT and GPA make up 95%, then everything else is 5%. Since that includes personal statement, letters of recommendation, resume, grade trends, diversity, etc., it seems pretty clear that undergraduate institution matters very little.

So do you go to H, Y, or P?

But I don't think we can theoretically look at it that way. The percentage points for the UG school will be directly applied to the interpretation of the objective factors. So if you have a 3.8/157 from Cal State Desert Dirt, your GPA can be downgraded at many law schools by about .3 - .6 because of lack of competition and grade inflation and your LSAT score may be downgraded because it is in the 45% for LSDAS registrants from your school. UG school makes a difference but the degree of difference will vary between adcoms and depend on their applicant pools.

[PDaddy]

With the amount of grade inflation going on in the ivy league, I'm not so sure all the ivies are harder than the top public schools. The mean GPA at Harvard is 3.45, Cornell is 3.36, Columbia is 3.42. lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Private schools on average, are .3 higher than public schools.

There is already a boost built in. A significant one.

I'm not sure about what happens in the northeast, but in my high school in the richer area of the Chicago suburbs, almost no one even applied to Ivy league schools. Most of the top of the class went to a flagship state school. The one girl, in my year, who went to Cornell, was lower ranked than me, and was in none of the AP classes.

While I don't doubt the average ivy league student is better than the top public schools, it's not a night at day difference.

And I'll put the graduating class at UIUC electrical engineering against any class in the country. Ok well MIT is probably better.

All I know is that I have had the pleasure of creaming students from Princeton, Harvard and Brown in the classroom. I went to a public school, albeit a top-10 one.

[sundevil77]

I have a professor at ASU who has taught both at Princeton and Wharton. His experience is that ASU tends to be academically more rigorous than a highly acclaimed business school like Wharton. The difference, in his opinion, is that ASU tends to focus on the academic coursework while the faculty at Wharton focused on grooming their students for the business world. Wharton would be the better school to go to, but it wouldn't necessarily be more difficult when it comes to grades. Something to think about.

[RVP11]

I have a professor at ASU who has taught both at Princeton and Wharton. His experience is that ASU tends to be academically more rigorous than a highly acclaimed business school like Wharton. The difference, in his opinion, is that ASU tends to focus on the academic coursework while the faculty at Wharton focused on grooming their students for the business world. Wharton would be the better school to go to, but it wouldn't necessarily be more difficult when it comes to grades. Something to think about.

Your prof's on crack, mate.

[PDaddy]

I have a professor at ASU who has taught both at Princeton and Wharton. His experience is that ASU tends to be academically more rigorous than a highly acclaimed business school like Wharton. The difference, in his opinion, is that ASU tends to focus on the academic coursework while the faculty at Wharton focused on grooming their students for the business world. Wharton would be the better school to go to, but it wouldn't necessarily be more difficult when it comes to grades. Something to think about.

+1

And I'll add to that the image factor. Even if their students were not as good as advertised, does anyone actually believe the Ivy League would allow it's mystique to disintegrate? Those schools practice grade inflation for a reason: prestige = $$$$$

[s0ph1e2007]

I'll say this because there is no Princeton Law School. I have several friends that went to Princeton for undergrad. I did not. Here's what they told me about their undergraduate experience: Sure, there were a select few truly brilliant, bright kids. Most were not of this kind. Most came from somewhat privileged to extremely privileged backgrounds and once away from home did a MOUNTAIN of drugs throughout their 4, sometimes 5 years. They got through it because, from what I was told, it wasn't that intensive from an academic point of view and there were several more fluffy majors to choose from. It's not all vigorous scholarship, class and decorum in those IVY leagues, you know.

Here's what I think about a poor kid who went to a state or no-name college and pulled a 3.7-4.0.... they're hungry. Add a high LSAT to that and you tell me if the "snob appeal" of your undergraduate institution would still matter.

It is hard for me to understand why people so clearly unable to reason well want to go to law school.

You think an Ivy League education is fluff because your princeton friends told you so? I would imagine they were telling you that so that you would not feel inferior. So what you should have learned from this is that you have nice friends not that ivy leauge schools are easy, which is clearly untrue.

A GPA from an ivy league school is going to have a greater weight than a similar gpa from an easier school. Every T-14 admission officer will tell you that when they see a 3.5 from Ohio State and a 3.5 from Harvard, they believe in the very least (ignoring any assumptions of intelligence) that the Harvard student worked harder.

No need to call me out on being an ivy leauge student. I admit that, but that does not prevent my point from being unbiased.

With the amount of grade inflation going on in the ivy league, I'm not so sure all the ivies are harder than the top public schools. The mean GPA at Harvard is 3.45, Cornell is 3.36, Columbia is 3.42. lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Private schools on average, are .3 higher than public schools.

There is already a boost built in. A significant one.

I'm not sure about what happens in the northeast, but in my high school in the richer area of the Chicago suburbs, almost no one even applied to Ivy league schools. Most of the top of the class went to a flagship state school. The one girl, in my year, who went to Cornell, was lower ranked than me, and was in none of the AP classes.

While I don't doubt the average ivy league student is better than the top public schools, it's not a night at day difference.

And I'll put the graduating class at UIUC electrical engineering against any class in the country. Ok well MIT is probably better.

you're assuming a cause that is not neccesarily true.
For instance, the fact that some particularly low ranked school has a lower average gpa than say Princeton does no mean that princeton is easier. It may however meant that Princeton is stacked with students that are unable to handle getting low grades (since they spent theyre whole lives working hard to get into princeton) and therefore all study harder than the average kid at low-ranked-school-x who has spent his whole life largely ignoring his homework (*i am not generalizing about all students at low ranked schools)

I do want to clarify though that a student who does exceptionally well at a low ranked school most likely worked just as hard as a student who did very well at a very high ranked school. Whether that student is as qualified to succeed in law school is a whole other matter. I think in most cases they would be.

I just wanted to point out that your inference from decreasing average gpas as ranking of school decreased was flawed.

[Reedie]

lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Those examples aren't very good because those are all top flight public universities. If people are thinking there is some huge difference between Cornell and Wisconsin they are fooling themselves. The bottom of the class at Cornell might be stronger than the bottom of the class at Wisonsin, but the top of the class at Wisconsin is as strong as just about anywhere else.

[PDaddy]

I'll say this because there is no Princeton Law School. I have several friends that went to Princeton for undergrad. I did not. Here's what they told me about their undergraduate experience: Sure, there were a select few truly brilliant, bright kids. Most were not of this kind. Most came from somewhat privileged to extremely privileged backgrounds and once away from home did a MOUNTAIN of drugs throughout their 4, sometimes 5 years. They got through it because, from what I was told, it wasn't that intensive from an academic point of view and there were several more fluffy majors to choose from. It's not all vigorous scholarship, class and decorum in those IVY leagues, you know.

Here's what I think about a poor kid who went to a state or no-name college and pulled a 3.7-4.0.... they're hungry. Add a high LSAT to that and you tell me if the "snob appeal" of your undergraduate institution would still matter.

It is hard for me to understand why people so clearly unable to reason well want to go to law school.

You think an Ivy League education is fluff because your princeton friends told you so? I would imagine they were telling you that so that you would not feel inferior. So what you should have learned from this is that you have nice friends not that ivy leauge schools are easy, which is clearly untrue.

A GPA from an ivy league school is going to have a greater weight than a similar gpa from an easier school. Every T-14 admission officer will tell you that when they see a 3.5 from Ohio State and a 3.5 from Harvard, they believe in the very least (ignoring any assumptions of intelligence) that the Harvard student worked harder.

No need to call me out on being an ivy leauge student. I admit that, but that does not prevent my point from being unbiased.

With the amount of grade inflation going on in the ivy league, I'm not so sure all the ivies are harder than the top public schools. The mean GPA at Harvard is 3.45, Cornell is 3.36, Columbia is 3.42. lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Private schools on average, are .3 higher than public schools.

There is already a boost built in. A significant one.

I'm not sure about what happens in the northeast, but in my high school in the richer area of the Chicago suburbs, almost no one even applied to Ivy league schools. Most of the top of the class went to a flagship state school. The one girl, in my year, who went to Cornell, was lower ranked than me, and was in none of the AP classes.

While I don't doubt the average ivy league student is better than the top public schools, it's not a night at day difference.

And I'll put the graduating class at UIUC electrical engineering against any class in the country. Ok well MIT is probably better.

you're assuming a cause that is not neccesarily true.
For instance, the fact that some particularly low ranked school has a lower average gpa than say Princeton does no mean that princeton is easier. It may however meant that Princeton is stacked with students that are unable to handle getting low grades (since they spent theyre whole lives working hard to get into princeton) and therefore all study harder than the average kid at low-ranked-school-x who has spent his whole life largely ignoring his homework (*i am not generalizing about all students at low ranked schools)

I do want to clarify though that a student who does exceptionally well at a low ranked school most likely worked just as hard as a student who did very well at a very high ranked school. Whether that student is as qualified to succeed in law school is a whole other matter. I think in most cases they would be.

I just wanted to point out that your inference from decreasing average gpas as ranking of school decreased was flawed.

To make those extrapolations, one would have to assume the schools to be relatively equal in facilities, resources and teaching quality.

[s0ph1e2007]

To make those extrapolations, one would have to assume the schools to be relatively equal in facilities, resources and teaching quality.

Yes and similar work ethic and abilitiy of students.
Basically the unis and uni student bodies would have to be the same

[crackberry]

Let's not pretend that a school like Arizona State is better than Harvard. That is totally ridiculous. I don't care what one professor says. Come on. I hate Harvard and that's a joke to me.

[sundevil77]

Let's not pretend that a school like Arizona State is better than Harvard. That is totally ridiculous. I don't care what one professor says. Come on. I hate Harvard and that's a joke to me.

I didn't say ASU was better, and I certainly don't believe it's better. I'm certain that every ASU student, cost being held equal, would choose Wharton over ASU's MBA program The point he was trying to make is that the schools were focusing on different things. In his opinion ASU was focusing more on book work, while Wharton was focusing more on practical knowledge. I know the evidence is anecdotal, but I think it shows that we can't just assume that a GPA from HYP is harder to achieve than a GPA from other schools.

[RVP11]

Let's not pretend that a school like Arizona State is better than Harvard. That is totally ridiculous. I don't care what one professor says. Come on. I hate Harvard and that's a joke to me.

I didn't say ASU was better, and I certainly don't believe it's better. I'm certain that every ASU student, cost being held equal, would choose Wharton over ASU's MBA program The point he was trying to make is that the schools were focusing on different things. In his opinion ASU was focusing more on book work, while Wharton was focusing more on practical knowledge. I know the evidence is anecdotal, but I think it shows that we can't just assume that a GPA from HYP is harder to achieve than a GPA from other schools.

Not all other schools, but ASU yes.

In general, though, this topic is laughable. There are very few majors and very few undergraduate schools that are genuinely rigorous or difficult.

[09042014]

I'll say this because there is no Princeton Law School. I have several friends that went to Princeton for undergrad. I did not. Here's what they told me about their undergraduate experience: Sure, there were a select few truly brilliant, bright kids. Most were not of this kind. Most came from somewhat privileged to extremely privileged backgrounds and once away from home did a MOUNTAIN of drugs throughout their 4, sometimes 5 years. They got through it because, from what I was told, it wasn't that intensive from an academic point of view and there were several more fluffy majors to choose from. It's not all vigorous scholarship, class and decorum in those IVY leagues, you know.

Here's what I think about a poor kid who went to a state or no-name college and pulled a 3.7-4.0.... they're hungry. Add a high LSAT to that and you tell me if the "snob appeal" of your undergraduate institution would still matter.

It is hard for me to understand why people so clearly unable to reason well want to go to law school.

You think an Ivy League education is fluff because your princeton friends told you so? I would imagine they were telling you that so that you would not feel inferior. So what you should have learned from this is that you have nice friends not that ivy leauge schools are easy, which is clearly untrue.

A GPA from an ivy league school is going to have a greater weight than a similar gpa from an easier school. Every T-14 admission officer will tell you that when they see a 3.5 from Ohio State and a 3.5 from Harvard, they believe in the very least (ignoring any assumptions of intelligence) that the Harvard student worked harder.

No need to call me out on being an ivy leauge student. I admit that, but that does not prevent my point from being unbiased.

With the amount of grade inflation going on in the ivy league, I'm not so sure all the ivies are harder than the top public schools. The mean GPA at Harvard is 3.45, Cornell is 3.36, Columbia is 3.42. lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Private schools on average, are .3 higher than public schools.

There is already a boost built in. A significant one.

I'm not sure about what happens in the northeast, but in my high school in the richer area of the Chicago suburbs, almost no one even applied to Ivy league schools. Most of the top of the class went to a flagship state school. The one girl, in my year, who went to Cornell, was lower ranked than me, and was in none of the AP classes.

While I don't doubt the average ivy league student is better than the top public schools, it's not a night at day difference.

And I'll put the graduating class at UIUC electrical engineering against any class in the country. Ok well MIT is probably better.

you're assuming a cause that is not neccesarily true.
For instance, the fact that some particularly low ranked school has a lower average gpa than say Princeton does no mean that princeton is easier. It may however meant that Princeton is stacked with students that are unable to handle getting low grades (since they spent theyre whole lives working hard to get into princeton) and therefore all study harder than the average kid at low-ranked-school-x who has spent his whole life largely ignoring his homework (*i am not generalizing about all students at low ranked schools)

I do want to clarify though that a student who does exceptionally well at a low ranked school most likely worked just as hard as a student who did very well at a very high ranked school. Whether that student is as qualified to succeed in law school is a whole other matter. I think in most cases they would be.

I just wanted to point out that your inference from decreasing average gpas as ranking of school decreased was flawed.

Princeton students didn't spend their entire lives working to get into Princeton. High school is extremely easy. Lots of brilliant but lazy students dominate high school but don't cut it in college level work due to laziness. A lot of bored high school students turn it up.

If its harder to get an A at ivy league schools compared to other top schools its not considerably harder. Is it considerably harder to get an A at princeton that Southern Illinois? Probably much harder.

If one wants to subjectively judge GPA's, ivy vs non ivy shouldn't be the distinction. Quality of the institution (and not by the USNWR rank which is biased against public schools) should be considered, and also difficulty of classwork taken.

[09042014]

Let's not pretend that a school like Arizona State is better than Harvard. That is totally ridiculous. I don't care what one professor says. Come on. I hate Harvard and that's a joke to me.

I'd agree with this.

[Kretzy]

lllinois is 3.19, Wisconsin is 3.2, Georgia Tech is 3.07.

Those examples aren't very good because those are all top flight public universities. If people are thinking there is some huge difference between Cornell and Wisconsin they are fooling themselves. The bottom of the class at Cornell might be stronger than the bottom of the class at Wisonsin, but the top of the class at Wisconsin is as strong as just about anywhere else.

This is VERY credited. I went to a top small private UG, but would put the top 10 percent of my class against the top 10 percent at Colorado School of Mines or CU-Boulder any day of the week. I'd say we're pretty similar.

I think people are underestimating, though, the importance of your QOL when it comes to UG performance and grad school readiness. I had an amazing UG experience, and it helped my GPA and extracurricular record a great deal. Folks who go to a terrible school and get a 4.0 in a terrible major on purpose are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to finally buckling down, IMO.

[reasonabledoubt]

I never thought I'd say this, but thank goodness for the LSAT. See above how controversial law school admissions would be if it weren't for that pesky little test. LSAT, now I see your inner beauty. I'm sorry about making up new meanings for what your letters stood for when I was angry and preparing for you.

[BenJ]

I have a professor at ASU who has taught both at Princeton and Wharton. His experience is that ASU tends to be academically more rigorous than a highly acclaimed business school like Wharton. The difference, in his opinion, is that ASU tends to focus on the academic coursework while the faculty at Wharton focused on grooming their students for the business world. Wharton would be the better school to go to, but it wouldn't necessarily be more difficult when it comes to grades. Something to think about.

+1

And I'll add to that the image factor. Even if their students were not as good as advertised, does anyone actually believe the Ivy League would allow it's mystique to disintegrate? Those schools practice grade inflation for a reason: prestige = $$$$$

Huge difference between your T10 public (Michigan/UVA/UNC/Wisconsin/whatever) and a joke party school like ASU. His professor is absolutely crazy and probably got fired from Wharton and is bitter.

[UFMatt]

I think most of us are smart enough to realize the folly of equating undergraduate institution with ability. Many of us went to state schools for free instead of taking out a mortgage for a bachelors degree.

As for the effect upon law school admission, I bet it is minimal. Even the strongest of softs have the faintest effect, and undergrad institution is not one of the strongest of softs. Between identical candidates, the prestigious undergrad will probably win out, but I don't see it making up for inferior numbers.

I think the OP answered the question in the thread title. It's snob appeal.

[Zapatero]

This same topic arises every single day. We need a "Does your UG matter?" link on the homepage.

[sundevil77]

Let's not pretend that a school like Arizona State is better than Harvard. That is totally ridiculous. I don't care what one professor says. Come on. I hate Harvard and that's a joke to me.

I'd agree with this.

Again, I didn't claim that ASU is better than Harvard or any other top school. I'm not an idiot. Just making a point that we shouldn't just assume that a certain GPA at a top school is harder to attain than the same GPA at a lower ranked school.

[sundevil77]

I have a professor at ASU who has taught both at Princeton and Wharton. His experience is that ASU tends to be academically more rigorous than a highly acclaimed business school like Wharton. The difference, in his opinion, is that ASU tends to focus on the academic coursework while the faculty at Wharton focused on grooming their students for the business world. Wharton would be the better school to go to, but it wouldn't necessarily be more difficult when it comes to grades. Something to think about.

+1

And I'll add to that the image factor. Even if their students were not as good as advertised, does anyone actually believe the Ivy League would allow it's mystique to disintegrate? Those schools practice grade inflation for a reason: prestige = $$$$$

Huge difference between your T10 public (Michigan/UVA/UNC/Wisconsin/whatever) and a joke party school like ASU. His professor is absolutely crazy and probably got fired from Wharton and is bitter.

Maybe. Keep in mind though, with an enrollment of nearly 60,000 at ASU, there are some very bright students at the top of the class.

And I think the prof left Wharton to go do a PhD in Statistics at Stanford.

[bloodonthetracks]

if you think an applicant's UG doesn't matter, you are delusional. just fucking accept it.