Jump to content
portajohn

Willie's Earth Shattering News

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Fletcher said:

Unless HLS told you everyone's LSAT and GPA, this doesn't prove your (erroneous) point. Quality of undergraduate school is a big factor in admission decisions.

Citation needed, Counselor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've worked at a law school (a pretty solid one). The idea that you can't get into an elite school if you didn't go to one for undergrad is ludicrous. As MajorKong posted, the school list of the Harvard admits is a matter of public record. GPA + LSAT is king in law school admissions because the medians are extremely important for rankings and the easiest to control/manipulate. And law school administrators are OBSESSED with rankings. Of all the types of graduate school admissions, law school is the easiest to predict because so much of it just comes down to GPA/LSAT combo. 

I even knew a student who went to a state school undergrad, year one at our state school law school, and then transferred to Harvard for the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone currently at a T-13 law school, I say with full confidence that where you went to undergrad matters very little and only on the margins for law school admissions. The poster above who said it is almost entirely based on LSAT and undergrad GPA is correct. LSAT and undergrad GPA accounts for nearly 1/5 of what goes into a  law school's U.S. News and World Report ranking. Since this is the most easily manipulated stat in the methodology that U.S. News and World report uses, admissions committees care most about getting high undergrad GPA medians and LSAT scores to boost their law school rankings. It is for this reason that the University of Florida has risen nearly 30 spots in the law school rankings over the last 5 years as the school has made a concerted effort to raise their class profile by offering large scholarships to high LSAT and high undergrad GPA students.

At my T-13 school, I have classmates from Ivy league and their equivalent undergrads, but the student body as a whole is primarily composed of individuals who went to far "less prestigious" state schools. Bottom line, Harvard Law and other top law schools are going to take a 3.9+ GPA, 172 LSAT from the University of Alabama over a 3.6, 168 LSAT from an Ivy League School. I say this as someone who went to a top undergrad and despite having a high LSAT score, struggled to get into the top law schools because my undergrad school deflates GPAs compared to most schools. 

On the other hand, top MBA programs care a lot more about your undergrad school (as well as your subsequent work experience) than they do about your undergrad GPA (although GMAT still applies). I got into every M7 B school that I applied to (Wharton, Booth, and Kellogg) despite a much lower GPA than those schools' medians.

Edited by AFWahoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NJDan said:

You say, "A 3.9 from Rutgers is better than a 3.75 from U Chicago, all else being equal." But the point you refuse to understand is that all else is not equal because the Rutgers and U Chicago are not equal. Rutgers may put a kid or two per year into Harvard Law. Chicago and other top schools will put many. That said, being an All American in any sport will, I think, be worth quite a bit.  Even tho grad schools have no sports teams, they do respect achievement outside the classroom.

Yes, but you're also ignoring that students have to have elite grades and test scores to get into those schools in the first place and are therefore also more likely to do well on the LSAT. UChicago has far more kids capable of a 175 LSAT than Rutgers does. Bottom line is, if you don't have the GPA/LSAT, you're fighting an uphill battle regardless of where you went to school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Poopy butthole said:

By the time someone is ready to practice medicine or law, where they went for their undergrad degree matters next to nothing to an employer.

He isn't a lawyer or a doctor, but when people see my brothers M.S.  from MIT, they aren't very concerned about where his got his bachelors or his first masters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NJDan said:

You say, "A 3.9 from Rutgers is better than a 3.75 from U Chicago, all else being equal." But the point you refuse to understand is that all else is not equal because the Rutgers and U Chicago are not equal. Rutgers may put a kid or two per year into Harvard Law. Chicago and other top schools will put many. That said, being an All American in any sport will, I think, be worth quite a bit.  Even tho grad schools have no sports teams, they do respect achievement outside the classroom.

All else meaning LSAT, URM status, compelling personal history (like being an NCAA Champ). It's 90% numbers - LSAT and GPA - which is what the USNWR rankings are heavily based on.

When my kid went through the process I thought it was unfair based on the very argument you make. He had a 3.76 GPA from an ultra competitive school, but was told by various admissions people that that would only give him a .1 gpa boost versus a "regular" school. Fortunately he had a super high LSAT, which got him in everywhere the admission calculators predicted - based purely on numbers as the calculators (which are very accurate) don't factor in anything but GPA and LSAT. No undergrad school, extracurriculars ("softs" as they are called).

Check out the whole law school admissions world. It's weird and defies common sense until you remember the rankings rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BobDole said:

The news is Jimmy Kennedy and Andrew Howe will be fired from Northwestern because they won't get the vaccine. They have until October 1st it seems.

LOL    The ultimate nothing burger!!  Willie is shameless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AFWahoo said:

As someone currently at a T-13 law school, I say with full confidence that where you went to undergrad matters very little and only on the margins for law school admissions. The poster above who said it is almost entirely based on LSAT and undergrad GPA is correct. LSAT and undergrad GPA accounts for nearly 1/5 of what goes into a  law school's U.S. News and World Report ranking. Since this is the most easily manipulated stat in the methodology that U.S. News and World report uses, admissions committees care most about getting high undergrad GPA medians and LSAT scores to boost their law school rankings. It is for this reason that the University of Florida has risen nearly 30 spots in the law school rankings over the last 5 years as the school has made a concerted effort to raise their class profile by offering large scholarships to high LSAT and high undergrad GPA students.

At my T-13 school, I have classmates from Ivy league and their equivalent undergrads, but the student body as a whole is primarily composed of individuals who went to far "less prestigious" state schools. Bottom line, Harvard Law and other top law schools are going to take a 3.9+ GPA, 172 LSAT from the University of Alabama over a 3.6, 168 LSAT from an Ivy League School. I say this as someone who went to a top undergrad and despite having a high LSAT score, struggled to get into the top law schools because my undergrad school deflates GPAs compared to most schools. 

On the other hand, top MBA programs care a lot more about your undergrad school (as well as your subsequent work experience) than they do about your undergrad GPA (although GMAT still applies). I got into every M7 B school that I applied to (Wharton, Booth, and Kellogg) despite a much lower GPA than those schools' medians.

Spot on overall, but especially this part. Every all-staff meeting I ever had at the law school had an extensive section covering our ranking, whether it changed, what accounted for that change, and our future plan to improve which then immediately segued into admissions, where our median gpa and lsat currently sat and how we're planning to target higher scorers.

For example, our median gpa was pretty solid, but our median LSAT was a couple points lower than we thought we could do, so we began targeting "splitters" (students with a much higher LSAT score compared to their gpa) who were less likely to get into/receive good scholarships from schools their LSAT score would typically indicate. On the flipside "reverse splitters" were given lower preference because their comparatively low LSAT score hurts our admissions targets.

It's a big game and rankings are the name of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AFWahoo said:

Bottom line, Harvard Law and other top law schools are going to take a 3.9+ GPA, 172 LSAT from the University of Alabama over a 3.6, 168 LSAT from an Ivy League School.

This is incorrect. HLS will take one kid from Alabama, Nebraska, etc. to show geographic diversity, but the standards are more stringent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hammerlockthree said:

Did this news materialize.....

It was the firing of Kennedy and Howe for refusing to get vaccinated, which led directly to Carter Young deciding to take his talents (back) to Stillwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fletcher said:

This is incorrect. HLS will take one kid from Alabama, Nebraska, etc. to show geographic diversity, but the standards are more stringent.

Dude, you are 100% wrong. I have multiple friends currently at HLS who went to the University of Alabama. HLS like every other law school cares most about undergrad GPA and LSAT. Heck, Harvard isn't even the best law school. Yale is the best, and it is probably the only law school where undergraduate school actually matters and the only reason it matters is because of how the admission's committee works there. After the admission's office makes an initial determination about a candidate's competitiveness, they give the applications to a panel of faculty members who make their own recommendations. Sometimes, those faculty members have views that only students from elite undergrads should get into Yale. But Yale is such an anomaly in the law school world, that if you even make it to the faculty portion of the committee, chances are you are getting into Harvard or Stanford and getting a large scholarship to another T-13. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Educate yourself and go to top-law-schools.com or any other law admissions website. Law school admissions is a numbers game, plain and simple.

Edited by AFWahoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, where you go to law school matters A LOT in terms of likely job outcomes. The top law firms mostly will only recruit out of the top law schools, and even when they hire someone from a lower ranked state school, that student is usually at or near the top of their class. Same applies for Article III clerkships. Many judges will hire students in the top 10% at a T-13, but on the average you probably need to be one of the top 5 students overall in your class to land one of these clerkships from a lower ranked school (although not always the case). For instance, UF has only had one graduate ever clerk for a Supreme Court justice, whereas Harvard, Yale, and Stanford have multiple graduates clerking on SCOTUS every term with Chicago and UVA usually having at least one every term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that both Kennedy and Howe should be able to resurface somewhere (most likely lower profile) whose vaccine policy is more aligned with their thinking.  

And the program will likewise be able to fill these coaching positions with a couple of solid guys who are more aligned with their thinking.

I personally like when we have lots of different philosophies within the same community, so we learn to better understand and respect each other's perspective.  So the saddest aspect for me is the reinforcement of thought silos.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AFWahoo said:

Dude, you are 100% wrong. I have multiple friends currently at HLS who went to the University of Alabama. HLS like every other law school cares most about undergrad GPA and LSAT. Heck, Harvard isn't even the best law school. Yale is the best, and it is probably the only law school where undergraduate school actually matters and the only reason it matters is because of how the admission's committee works there. After the admission's office makes an initial determination about a candidate's competitiveness, they give the applications to a panel of faculty members who make their own recommendations. Sometimes, those faculty members have views that only students from elite undergrads should get into Yale. But Yale is such an anomaly in the law school world, that if you even make it to the faculty portion of the committee, chances are you are getting into Harvard or Stanford and getting a large scholarship to another T-13. 

Harvard is an especially odd example for him to fixate on because they have one of the largest classes and are a big law factory. They're all about the numbers. Maybe things were different when he went to law school 30 years ago.

As you note, Yale is the only school that operates in a way that can resemble the good ol' boys network. And not coincidentally, they have a tiny class size and comparatively low big law entry rate. You go to Yale to clerk and take your rightful place in the aristocracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AFWahoo said:

Dude, you are 100% wrong. I have multiple friends currently at HLS who went to the University of Alabama. HLS like every other law school cares most about undergrad GPA and LSAT. Heck, Harvard isn't even the best law school. Yale is the best, and it is probably the only law school where undergraduate school actually matters and the only reason it matters is because of how the admission's committee works there. After the admission's office makes an initial determination about a candidate's competitiveness, they give the applications to a panel of faculty members who make their own recommendations. Sometimes, those faculty members have views that only students from elite undergrads should get into Yale. But Yale is such an anomaly in the law school world, that if you even make it to the faculty portion of the committee, chances are you are getting into Harvard or Stanford and getting a large scholarship to another T-13. 

You are spot on. Nice to hear from people who actually know the process and aren't just spouting off based on their preconceived opinions. My son is at HLS and got waitlisted at YLS,  - just as the calculators predicted, a prediction based purely on GPA, LSAT and non-URM status. Hell, the calculators even predicted yield-protect waitlists from UM and Penn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an indictment of wrestling journalism that there is not a single published story about this news. The entire assistant coaching staff at a Big Ten school is allegedly getting fired three weeks before official practice begins, and the only source is a video on Rokfin that started with five minutes of talk about bagels. Why isn't there a story on InterMat about this, especially since the breaker of the news owns that site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

Harvard is an especially odd example for him to fixate on because they have one of the largest classes and are a big law factory. They're all about the numbers. Maybe things were different when he went to law school 30 years ago.

As you note, Yale is the only school that operates in a way that can resemble the good ol' boys network. And not coincidentally, they have a tiny class size and comparatively low big law entry rate. You go to Yale to clerk and take your rightful place in the aristocracy.

Yep. I briefly considered transferring to HLS after my 1L year but decided against it as I wasn't going to get anything more out of going there than I was out of where I already was. Ended up spending my 2L summer at one of the top firms in DC and have two federal clerkships lined up after graduation, one at the District level and one at the Circuit level. I don't have the grades to be competitive for a SCOTUS clerkship and going to HLS wasn't going to magically change that.

On the flip side, a section mate of mine did transfer to HLS which made zero sense to me. They actually ended up at a worse firm than they could have obtained had they just stayed and were basically starting from scratch with making connections with professors for clerkship recommendations. Another friend of mine went from a much lower ranked law school to HLS, but it made sense in that situation since that individual wanted to work in London due to their spouse working in Europe. They weren't going to get an offer from a London firm from their prior school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...