Would you take Tufts, Emory, Wash U over UVA?

[Anonymous]

False. Many people have high LSAT scores it does not justify accepting tops beyond the very top of the HYP class at top graduate programs. Schools are using holistic admissions and weighting some schools degrees heavier than others.

[Anonymous]

Auto type: Many students have high LSAT scores. The number of ivy grads at top programs means that grad schools are accepting beyond the top of the class. Beside Cornell most class are below 2000 so accepting so many at top programs means that student who are not in the top of their HPY undergrad are obtaining admission to elite programs. It’s holistic and grad school are giving those degrees extra weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a regional school. I would take all those over UVA. Signed mom of a kid who got into UVA and went to ND. You can't beat the alumni networks of some of these schools. UVA is like going back to high school with older and more kids.

UVA is known nationwide. More people apply from outside Virginia than in.

UVA is very much a regional school. If your child wants to build his/her life in this area, UVA should be the choice. If they want to go West or North, Wash U; South - Emory; Tufts- I don't really think that will get you anything.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a regional school. I would take all those over UVA. Signed mom of a kid who got into UVA and went to ND. You can't beat the alumni networks of some of these schools. UVA is like going back to high school with older and more kids.

UVA is known nationwide. More people apply from outside Virginia than in.

UVA is very much a regional school. If your child wants to build his/her life in this area, UVA should be the choice. If they want to go West or North, Wash U; South - Emory; Tufts- I don't really think that will get you anything.

+1

You're being silly. Almost every school in this country is "regional" in a sense. UVA is more national than most. After all, 28,000 of its 40,000 applications are from out of state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a regional school. I would take all those over UVA. Signed mom of a kid who got into UVA and went to ND. You can't beat the alumni networks of some of these schools. UVA is like going back to high school with older and more kids.

UVA is known nationwide. More people apply from outside Virginia than in.

UVA is very much a regional school. If your child wants to build his/her life in this area, UVA should be the choice. If they want to go West or North, Wash U; South - Emory; Tufts- I don't really think that will get you anything.

+1

You're being silly. Almost every school in this country is "regional" in a sense. UVA is more national than most. After all, 28,000 of its 40,000 applications are from out of state.

Please. Look up the term regional. Look at the states they are applying from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a regional school. I would take all those over UVA. Signed mom of a kid who got into UVA and went to ND. You can't beat the alumni networks of some of these schools. UVA is like going back to high school with older and more kids.

UVA is known nationwide. More people apply from outside Virginia than in.

UVA is very much a regional school. If your child wants to build his/her life in this area, UVA should be the choice. If they want to go West or North, Wash U; South - Emory; Tufts- I don't really think that will get you anything.

+1

You're being silly. Almost every school in this country is "regional" in a sense. UVA is more national than most. After all, 28,000 of its 40,000 applications are from out of state.

Please. Look up the term regional. Look at the states they are applying from.

UVA doesn't publish the states where applicants are from. They just publish the IS to OOS breakdowns and most of the applications come from outside of Virginia.

They publish where enrolled students are from. This doesn't include 2,343 internationals.

[Anonymous]

So few DODDS children!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is a regional school. I would take all those over UVA. Signed mom of a kid who got into UVA and went to ND. You can't beat the alumni networks of some of these schools. UVA is like going back to high school with older and more kids.

UVA is known nationwide. More people apply from outside Virginia than in.

UVA is very much a regional school. If your child wants to build his/her life in this area, UVA should be the choice. If they want to go West or North, Wash U; South - Emory; Tufts- I don't really think that will get you anything.

+1

You're being silly. Almost every school in this country is "regional" in a sense. UVA is more national than most. After all, 28,000 of its 40,000 applications are from out of state.

Please. Look up the term regional. Look at the states they are applying from.

UVA doesn't publish the states where applicants are from. They just publish the IS to OOS breakdowns and most of the applications come from outside of Virginia.

They publish where enrolled students are from. This doesn't include 2,343 internationals.

Oh please. 70% of undergraduate enrollees are from Virginia. If that is not regional, I don't know what is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

I used Yale largely because it provides the data. Most schools don't. My view is similar -- there isn't that much difference between WashU/Tufts/Emory and UVA/W&M. The difference tends to be with the Ivy+. When I adjusted for size of undergraduate enrollment, it turned out that Ivy grads are about 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA grad. There was a huge range there, with Cornell grads being significantly less likely to end up at Yale Law compared to Yale/Harvard/Princeton. When you compare WashU/Tufts/Emory to UVA, they are only about 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law, but that is skewed by WashU, which is the highest.

If this looks like I am taking a shot at UVA, I am not. Looking at the numbers, it appears UVA does better than all publics except Berkeley and W&M, and seems to do pretty well against privates once you get out of the Ivy+.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

I used Yale largely because it provides the data. Most schools don't. My view is similar -- there isn't that much difference between WashU/Tufts/Emory and UVA/W&M. The difference tends to be with the Ivy+. When I adjusted for size of undergraduate enrollment, it turned out that Ivy grads are about 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA grad. There was a huge range there, with Cornell grads being significantly less likely to end up at Yale Law compared to Yale/Harvard/Princeton. When you compare WashU/Tufts/Emory to UVA, they are only about 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law, but that is skewed by WashU, which is the highest.

If this looks like I am taking a shot at UVA, I am not. Looking at the numbers, it appears UVA does better than all publics except Berkeley and W&M, and seems to do pretty well against privates once you get out of the Ivy+.

You're not taking a shot at UVA. I get that. But I also have a sense that you're not a lawyer either. If you were, you'd understand more that Yale really is different. You say you use them largely because they "provide the data when most schools don't." That's probably because their "data" is so extraordinary. No law school enrolls a class quite like Yale's. It's a much more selective school than even Harvard is. We can all agree that if you want to go to Yale Law, go to Harvard or Yale undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Auto type: Many students have high LSAT scores. The number of ivy grads at top programs means that grad schools are accepting beyond the top of the class. Beside Cornell most class are below 2000 so accepting so many at top programs means that student who are not in the top of their HPY undergrad are obtaining admission to elite programs. It’s holistic and grad school are giving those degrees extra weight.

I didn't say it was all down to LSAT taking ability. I am saying that is a factor as those schools by far have the highest average LSAT scores for graduates applying to law school. Here is some data for average LSAT from LSAC by undergraduate school: Yale 167.5; Harvard 167.4; Princeton 166.1; WashU 164.05; W&M 161.18; UVA 160.84; VT 156.05; JMU 154.07; VCU 151.71.

Beyond that, Ivy League average GPAs for undergraduates are among the highest. You can see that on gradeinflation.com.

So Ivy grads tend to have the highest average GPAs, the highest average LSATs. And when you get to ultra-selective schools like Yale Law, their undergraduate degree is no doubt a significant factor (or tie breaker) as many applicants will have high stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

I used Yale largely because it provides the data. Most schools don't. My view is similar -- there isn't that much difference between WashU/Tufts/Emory and UVA/W&M. The difference tends to be with the Ivy+. When I adjusted for size of undergraduate enrollment, it turned out that Ivy grads are about 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA grad. There was a huge range there, with Cornell grads being significantly less likely to end up at Yale Law compared to Yale/Harvard/Princeton. When you compare WashU/Tufts/Emory to UVA, they are only about 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law, but that is skewed by WashU, which is the highest.

If this looks like I am taking a shot at UVA, I am not. Looking at the numbers, it appears UVA does better than all publics except Berkeley and W&M, and seems to do pretty well against privates once you get out of the Ivy+.

You're not taking a shot at UVA. I get that. But I also have a sense that you're not a lawyer either. If you were, you'd understand more that Yale really is different. You say you use them largely because they "provide the data when most schools don't." That's probably because their "data" is so extraordinary. No law school enrolls a class quite like Yale's. It's a much more selective school than even Harvard is. We can all agree that if you want to go to Yale Law, go to Harvard or Yale undergrad.

No, it was really down to availability of data. It I'd have had Chicago, etc., I would have shown it. The only other top law school that seem to consistently publish top undergraduate feeder institutions is UVA. It only publishes top 15 or so. It shows, probably not surprisingly, UVA and W&M as top feeders. UVA has much, much less representation from Ivy schools than Yale Law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

I used Yale largely because it provides the data. Most schools don't. My view is similar -- there isn't that much difference between WashU/Tufts/Emory and UVA/W&M. The difference tends to be with the Ivy+. When I adjusted for size of undergraduate enrollment, it turned out that Ivy grads are about 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA grad. There was a huge range there, with Cornell grads being significantly less likely to end up at Yale Law compared to Yale/Harvard/Princeton. When you compare WashU/Tufts/Emory to UVA, they are only about 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law, but that is skewed by WashU, which is the highest.

If this looks like I am taking a shot at UVA, I am not. Looking at the numbers, it appears UVA does better than all publics except Berkeley and W&M, and seems to do pretty well against privates once you get out of the Ivy+.

You're not taking a shot at UVA. I get that. But I also have a sense that you're not a lawyer either. If you were, you'd understand more that Yale really is different. You say you use them largely because they "provide the data when most schools don't." That's probably because their "data" is so extraordinary. No law school enrolls a class quite like Yale's. It's a much more selective school than even Harvard is. We can all agree that if you want to go to Yale Law, go to Harvard or Yale undergrad.

No, it was really down to availability of data. It I'd have had Chicago, etc., I would have shown it. The only other top law school that seem to consistently publish top undergraduate feeder institutions is UVA. It only publishes top 15 or so. It shows, probably not surprisingly, UVA and W&M as top feeders. UVA has much, much less representation from Ivy schools than Yale Law.

Sigh. You're just not getting it. NO law school has Yale's class make up. None. Including Chicago. That UVA is a top ten law school and has "much much less" Ivy representation only proves the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary is probably more similar in size and feel to Washington University, Tufts, and Emory if that is what he wants. UVA is great if he wants a larger school, different experience. Perhaps schools like Duke, Columbia, Princeton, etc. would provide more opportunities, but I'm not convinced your private alternatives will. Perhaps focus on that level as reach.

This kind of vague advice is why students fall for the “prestige” factor that may or may not matter for them personally.

It made sense to me. They were just saying any difference in prestige wouldn't make much difference between the schools mentioned. It might for schools like Duke and Columbia.

I agree giving up in-state tuition at UVA means DC got into a top 10 school. UNless DC qualifies for significant financial aid. Also, Tufts isn't as good as UVA or the others, they just happen to be just as selective but academics wise the others are better.

What about 11? Seriously though, where does the arbitrary line exist?

Good question. All anyone can really tell you is their opinion. If I had to pay close to full vs. in-state for UVA or W&M and objective was perhaps law school, I'd say I'd find it hard not to send them to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, then probably Columbia, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, perhaps Williams, Amherst, and maybe Rice. If you are talking science, it would clearly open up MIT and Caltech. Most of these are extremely tough admits. So that is about 14 or so tops. Many would add Chicago. I'd draw the line before Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, Wash U, etc. This is all based on my situation and if I was fortunate enough to have a kid with those options.

It is clear that HYPS etc. do have significantly higher representation at elite law schools than UVA or W&M. I recall seeing that about 25% of Yale law students are from Harvard and Yale, and remaining Ivy League plus Stanford take it to 50% plus. But you have to consider that they probably had stellar SATs and would also get stellar LSATs.

Your numbers are wrong, especially at Harvard which is a very large law school. Ivy League representation is way less than 50 percent.

This was the article I remember seeing on Yale. I don't know about Harvard, but I would still think Ivy representation is very high compared to undergraduate population.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/04/18/up-close-tracing-the-elite-law-cycle/

I have never seen Harvard put numbers on it. Just a list of institutions represented: https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/jdadmissions/apply-to-harvard-law-school/undergraduate-colleges/

Yale is in a league of its own. Also, your article is a little dated.

At least I'm offering real data points. Here is a more recent view of Yale Law enrollment by undergraduate institutions from 2015. Of the schools mentioned, Tufts had 1, Washington University had 7, Emory had 4, UVA had 6, and W&M had 3.

In comparison, Yale had 69, Harvard had 65, Princeton had 37, Columbia had 30, Brown had 22, Dartmouth 19, Amherst 18, Penn 17, Stanford 16, Berkeley 16, and Williams and Duke 13.

Forgot to add the link: http://bulletin.printer.yale.edu/pdffiles/law.pdf

Thanks for the link. As I said, Yale really is in a league of its own. It's long been the most prestigious and selective law school and its yield is over 80 percent. And it, like many of the top law schools, favors its own undergraduates in admissions. I would be stunned if the Ivy League undergrad percentage for Harvard was nearly as high, but I'm also certain that Harvard would be the #1 undergrdad school represented (just as UVA undergrad is at UVA Law).

Finally, the OP isn't deciding between UVA and Yale, but between UVA and a bunch of other schools that are NOT, for the most part, better represented at Yale than UVA is. So you've proven the point that for law school UVA is just as good as any of them.

I used Yale largely because it provides the data. Most schools don't. My view is similar -- there isn't that much difference between WashU/Tufts/Emory and UVA/W&M. The difference tends to be with the Ivy+. When I adjusted for size of undergraduate enrollment, it turned out that Ivy grads are about 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA grad. There was a huge range there, with Cornell grads being significantly less likely to end up at Yale Law compared to Yale/Harvard/Princeton. When you compare WashU/Tufts/Emory to UVA, they are only about 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law, but that is skewed by WashU, which is the highest.

If this looks like I am taking a shot at UVA, I am not. Looking at the numbers, it appears UVA does better than all publics except Berkeley and W&M, and seems to do pretty well against privates once you get out of the Ivy+.

You're not taking a shot at UVA. I get that. But I also have a sense that you're not a lawyer either. If you were, you'd understand more that Yale really is different. You say you use them largely because they "provide the data when most schools don't." That's probably because their "data" is so extraordinary. No law school enrolls a class quite like Yale's. It's a much more selective school than even Harvard is. We can all agree that if you want to go to Yale Law, go to Harvard or Yale undergrad.

No, it was really down to availability of data. It I'd have had Chicago, etc., I would have shown it. The only other top law school that seem to consistently publish top undergraduate feeder institutions is UVA. It only publishes top 15 or so. It shows, probably not surprisingly, UVA and W&M as top feeders. UVA has much, much less representation from Ivy schools than Yale Law.

Sigh. You're just not getting it. NO law school has Yale's class make up. None. Including Chicago. That UVA is a top ten law school and has "much much less" Ivy representation only proves the point.

Don't sigh and I do get it. No law school has another's makeup. That is a given and Yale is as noted regarded as the most selective. What I was saying is if I had a broader set of data from elite law schools I would have used it. But it does not exist, so I can't. If you could aggregate data from say Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Stanford, Chicago, Penn, Michigan, UVA, Berkeley, NYU etc., it would be more meaningful. But the data isn't there.