Does a high ranked UG school make a difference? Forum

[Dick Whitman]

well f*ck me. I figured the better ranked university would have helped so... that sucks.

went to UNC.... at least the Heels won the championship, but I guess that's all I got.

Considering the number of UNC athletes who take several tries to qualify then graduate a few years later, it doesn't appear the academics there are all that tough.

[reasontobelieve]

I think it depends on what law school we're talking about. Someone said earlier that a 4.0 at a no name is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy. This is NOT true if you're applying to YLS and probably not at SLS either.

[huckabees]

I think it depends on what law school we're talking about. Someone said earlier that a 4.0 at a no name is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy. This is NOT true if you're applying to YLS and probably not at SLS either.

I think a 4.0 at a no-name is better than a 3.8 at even HYPS from the admissions standpoint of any school, except if the person who got the 4.0 majored in something like dance or communications.

If we changed that to a 3.9, then I'd say the HYPS 3.8 > no name school 3.9. I'd also say a 4.0 from a no name school with a questionable major is worse than a 3.8 with a solid major at a lot of schools.

[capitalacq]

I think it depends on what law school we're talking about. Someone said earlier that a 4.0 at a no name is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy. This is NOT true if you're applying to YLS and probably not at SLS either.

I think a 4.0 at a no-name is better than a 3.8 at even HYPS from the admissions standpoint of any school, except if the person who got the 4.0 majored in something like dance or communications.

Absolutely not the case.

[spinsta]

doesn't that seem... ridiculous?.. like if I knew I was going to law school, I should have just gone to an easier school (again, no offense to easier schools) which probably would have boosted my gpa.

I cant see how that makes sense.

A lot of the top schools also suffer from grade inflation. At my undergrad institution, the median grade for nearly every class I have been in is a B-. I have lots of friends at Harvard, Yale, Stanford and Cornell (36 kids in my HS graduating class alone went to Cornell). Most of them tell me that the median grades in lots of their classes are A-. Not all schools are this way, but it seems that the "top" UG schools seem to suffer more from students who feel "entitled" to get straight-A's b/c that's what they got in HS. Just a thought...

[huckabees]

I think it depends on what law school we're talking about. Someone said earlier that a 4.0 at a no name is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy. This is NOT true if you're applying to YLS and probably not at SLS either.

I think a 4.0 at a no-name is better than a 3.8 at even HYPS from the admissions standpoint of any school, except if the person who got the 4.0 majored in something like dance or communications.

Absolutely not the case.

Based on?

[riccardo426]

I think the 4.0 at podunk U is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy for admissions. I have a 3.8 from an Ivy, 3.95 in the last two years, and got WL at Berkeley, UVA and Georgetown for example with a lower end LSAT and great softs.


Us Ivy leaguers really like to judge people by UG and whatnot, but probably only half of the really gifted HS students choose top privates, while others simply choose to dominate at their respective state school for financial or personal reasons. I am fully convinced at this point that someone who can pull 3.95+ in any UG* and a 170+ LSAT has the work ethic and smarts to be a top student at an Ivy too.


* I still am not sure what I think about Community College and Online Courses, so maybe limit my statement to four year brick and mortar institutions.

[huckabees]

I think the 4.0 at podunk U is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy for admissions. I have a 3.8 from an Ivy, 3.95 in the last two years, and got WL at Berkeley, UVA and Georgetown for example with a lower end LSAT and great softs.


Us Ivy leaguers really like to judge people by UG and whatnot, but probably only half of the really gifted HS students choose top privates, while others simply choose to dominate at their respective state school for financial or personal reasons. I am fully convinced at this point that someone who can pull 3.95+ in any UG* and a 170+ LSAT has the work ethic and smarts to be a top student at an Ivy too.


* I still am not sure what I think about Community College and Online Courses, so maybe limit my statement to four year brick and mortar institutions.

Those waitlists seem odd, esp GULC

I can understand UVA, as they do have pretty high LSAT ranges and are having difficulties managing class size, but I don't really understand the results at the other two, despite Berkeley's reputation of being "unpredictable."

[riccardo426]

I think the 4.0 at podunk U is better than a 3.8 at an Ivy for admissions. I have a 3.8 from an Ivy, 3.95 in the last two years, and got WL at Berkeley, UVA and Georgetown for example with a lower end LSAT and great softs.


Us Ivy leaguers really like to judge people by UG and whatnot, but probably only half of the really gifted HS students choose top privates, while others simply choose to dominate at their respective state school for financial or personal reasons. I am fully convinced at this point that someone who can pull 3.95+ in any UG* and a 170+ LSAT has the work ethic and smarts to be a top student at an Ivy too.


* I still am not sure what I think about Community College and Online Courses, so maybe limit my statement to four year brick and mortar institutions.

Those waitlists seem odd, esp GULC

I can understand UVA, as they do have pretty high LSAT ranges and are having difficulties managing class size, but I don't really understand the results at the other two, despite Berkeley's reputation of being "unpredictable."

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

I'm thinking it will also do me in for WL at my top choice, Penn, who has yet to get back to me.

[Cleareyes]

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

Sounds reasonable, but also destroys your argument, don't you think? I had good enough stats for Harvard, applied late, and got waitlisted at Berk, UVA, and GULC. So we don't know whether your Ivy status helped or hindered you, because of your lateness.

Edit: Oh and I was waitlisted Penn as well.

[huckabees]

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

Sounds reasonable, but also destroys your argument, don't you think? I had good enough stats for Harvard but still got waitlisted at Berk, UVA, and GULC. So we don't know whether your Ivy status helped or hindered you, because of your lateness.

Edit: Oh and I was waitlisted Penn as well.

You think it may hinder in certain cases?

Or was that just a turn of phrase?

[Cleareyes]

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

Sounds reasonable, but also destroys your argument, don't you think? I had good enough stats for Harvard but still got waitlisted at Berk, UVA, and GULC. So we don't know whether your Ivy status helped or hindered you, because of your lateness.

Edit: Oh and I was waitlisted Penn as well.

You think it may hinder in certain cases?

No. I was just saying that you can't tell how it influenced the cycle as a variable because the lateness variable has such a strong effect (especially in promoting waitlists)

[huckabees]

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

Sounds reasonable, but also destroys your argument, don't you think? I had good enough stats for Harvard but still got waitlisted at Berk, UVA, and GULC. So we don't know whether your Ivy status helped or hindered you, because of your lateness.

Edit: Oh and I was waitlisted Penn as well.

You think it may hinder in certain cases?

No. I was just saying that you can't tell how it influenced the cycle as a variable because the lateness variable has such a strong effect (especially in promoting waitlists)

Yeah, I agree.

I do think that Ivy status helps you stand out later in the cycle for the very top schools, but there is a lot of evidence that MVBP prefers earlier applicants, to the point where it's almost impossible to be admitted past February with a set of numbers that had 80%+ admit rates in December.

[riccardo426]

My current explanation for GULC and B WL is that I applied late (mid-January). Little did I know that that's a death sentence at Berk - got WL after Faccom review.

Sounds reasonable, but also destroys your argument, don't you think? I had good enough stats for Harvard but still got waitlisted at Berk, UVA, and GULC. So we don't know whether your Ivy status helped or hindered you, because of your lateness.

Edit: Oh and I was waitlisted Penn as well.

You think it may hinder in certain cases?

No. I was just saying that you can't tell how it influenced the cycle as a variable because the lateness variable has such a strong effect (especially in promoting waitlists)

Yeah that's a good point. I also got into Michigan, which I attribute to my softs more than anything, and UCLA which I think may have been influenced by my ivy status. Applied at the same time as B, G and V.

But Harvard and Columbia did not even take a peek at my application and I got rejected pretty quickly. Though with a 167, even if I had an ability to telepathically cure cancer it probably wouldn't have helped.

[Cain]

So, have we come to a conclusion? Or are we still unsure about this subject?

[chadstew55]

So, have we come to a conclusion? Or are we still unsure about this subject?

haha!

[Bosque]

So, have we come to a conclusion? Or are we still unsure about this subject?

Yes, we have a solid conclusion.

Undergraduate institution never helps until it does.

[prezidentv8]

So, have we come to a conclusion? Or are we still unsure about this subject?

Yes, we have a solid conclusion.

Undergraduate institution never helps until it does.

I think you're one of my favorite posters. That seriously got a real-life laugh.

[Bosque]

So, have we come to a conclusion? Or are we still unsure about this subject?

Yes, we have a solid conclusion.

Undergraduate institution never helps until it does.

I think you're one of my favorite posters. That seriously got a real-life laugh.

[teege]

I am not saying any state school. I'm talking about the state schools that are ranked high v. the state schools that are ranked low.

I mean lets stop beating around the bush. Some schools are better and harder than others, yet if you get a 4.0 at an easier one, some people think schools recognize that all the same. I'm saying that if that is true, it's crap.

It has nothing to do with state schools v. private or whatever. Its good schools v. bad, or harder v. easier.

some state schools might fall into this category, some might not.

And UNC may be easier to get a 4.0 than all of the other state schools in NC. FWIW, I know plenty of people at Ivies and I am pretty sure it was easier to get a very high GPA than at my non-Ivy.

Why are you so bitter? Sub-3.0 GPA?

[huckabees]

I am not saying any state school. I'm talking about the state schools that are ranked high v. the state schools that are ranked low.

I mean lets stop beating around the bush. Some schools are better and harder than others, yet if you get a 4.0 at an easier one, some people think schools recognize that all the same. I'm saying that if that is true, it's crap.

It has nothing to do with state schools v. private or whatever. Its good schools v. bad, or harder v. easier.

some state schools might fall into this category, some might not.

And UNC may be easier to get a 4.0 than all of the other state schools in NC. FWIW, I know plenty of people at Ivies and I am pretty sure it was easier to get a very high GPA than at my non-Ivy.

Why are you so bitter? Sub-3.0 GPA?

That may be true, but FWIW, I know dozens of people at a state school (T-20 in state school rankings) who say that it is easier than high school and who worked less than they did in high school.

I do think it sucks for people who go to no name schools that are still difficult educationally.

[JTX]

bump

[Dr. Strangelove]

I'll let you guys know how my law school admissions process goes from Dook.
However, I think undergraduate major plays a bigger role than undergrad school attended, if we want to whine about college being hard...
Engineers, math majors, chem majors, physics majors, pre-meds all take classes in which it's really hard to get an A in or even a B... the humanities brats have it a lot easier. I think this is true at any school you go to.

[prezidentv8]

I'll let you guys know how my law school admissions process goes from Dook.
However, I think undergraduate major plays a bigger role than undergrad school attended, if we want to whine about college being hard...
Engineers, math majors, chem majors, physics majors, pre-meds all take classes in which it's really hard to get an A in or even a B... the humanities brats have it a lot easier. I think this is true at any school you go to.

Ohhhh heyyyy I iz a Duke guy now too

[charlesjd]

How many times has this been asked?!?!?

We all know that it really does not matter.

Someone with a 4.0 and 170 from TTTTT state school will have an edge over someone with a 3.8 and a 170 from an ivy. Schools are numbers whores and they admit it and say it is because of the rankings! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get a high LSAT in the 99th and call it a day.

/thread