Value of highly ranked undergrad if law school in your future

[Anonymous]

Students who are smart and driven enough to get into a top law school we’re likely smart and driven enough to get into a top college. They don’t get into the top law school because they went to the top college. They get in because of who they have always been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite the same question you're asking, but another consideration is the undergrad education they will get as an end in itself, not just a means to law school. Because, realistically, the plans made by a 17-18 year old who has not yet been out in the world much yet are almost certainly going to change over four years of college. I am also for minimizing debt, since we know that could impact their adult life for decades in negative ways. But I wouldn't choose an undergrad with the expectation that law school is of course going to be the next step. choose the undergrad for the undergrad that will be the best fit for them to learn and grow.

One of the PPs. I agree with this. Law school should not be a factor in choosing a prestigious school. However, one might decide to choose a prestigious school for other reasons, weighing all factors including cost.

I also agree with this, but I think doubt the difference in education quality between Wooster and Bates is enough to justify a $200k price tag differential. This seems like a no brainer to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students who are smart and driven enough to get into a top law school we’re likely smart and driven enough to get into a top college. They don’t get into the top law school because they went to the top college. They get in because of who they have always been.

As a "top law school lawyer" I guess it's not in my best interests to burst this bubble, but I've never been particularly driven. Smart, yes. Off-the-charts standardized test taker? Absolutely! But I was happy to coast to good grades in high school and undergrad, and I've been happy to coast in BigLaw. The Bar was the worst experience of my life because I really didn't know how to study and wasn't good at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Retired (praise Jesus) Biglaw (ugh) lawyer here

There is no way in hell that I'd recommend a kid or family going into debt to attend Bates over Wooster to increase the chance of T14 admissions. In fact, I wouldn't recommend going into debt to attend any college with the goal of goal to law school. No way.

Law school admissions are based almost entirely on GPA and LSAT, even at the so-called T14 level. Yale might be somewhat of an exception, because it's so small and so selective, but I wouldn't select a college based on the probability of getting admitted to Yale Law.

Interesting that you mention Yale, because they actually share the undergraduate schools of their law students:

https://law.yale.edu/admissions-financial-aid/jd-admissions/profiles-statistics/undergraduate-institutions-represented-yls-2020-24

Apparently it doesn't matter much there, as well.

The site below also shows where recent hires at Skadden Arps went for undergrad:

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/law/

Doesn't appear to matter to top law firms, either.

I never said it matters to law firms at all -- at law firms all that matters is the law school.

I also never said that Yale doesn't admit anyone who didn't attend a top college. I merely said it was "somewhat" of any exception. Yes, I'm aware of their published list for the last five years, but the list doesn't say how many students from each school was actually admitted and are attending. If you really have time, click on the Skadden website and read the bios of the Yale Law grads who work there. You'll see that the overwhelming majority went to elite colleges.

That list is about 180 schools. In five years, Yale had about 1000 students enroll. All this shows is that where you attend college is not a bar to entry, but without more data, it's impossible to say whether it is comparatively easier to get accepted at Yale if you're applying from certain schools rather than others. So you can't say that it doesn't matter.

Your last two sentences contradict each other, so I don't get your point. My point is that it DOES matter, at least "somewhat," at Yale. It's a small law school that is more selective than any in the country. The large majority of Yale Law students went to top colleges -- fact.

I think I probably would agree with you. You can get into Yale law from any undergraduate institution, but I think (not know) that it is easier to do some from a small group of colleges (certainly Yale undergrad). There is a difference between "can you do it" vs "how hard is it".

It's easier to do from Yale because there are way more ridiculously smart, hard-working, ambitious overachievers there than at less selective schools, not because Yale has a golden ticket they hand out to each graduate. A superstar is a superstar, regardless of where they get their education.

[Anonymous]

I graduated from Columbia with a JD/PhD in economics after graduating from Hunter College in Manhattan with zero debt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students who are smart and driven enough to get into a top law school we’re likely smart and driven enough to get into a top college. They don’t get into the top law school because they went to the top college. They get in because of who they have always been.

THANK YOU!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not quite the same question you're asking, but another consideration is the undergrad education they will get as an end in itself, not just a means to law school. Because, realistically, the plans made by a 17-18 year old who has not yet been out in the world much yet are almost certainly going to change over four years of college. I am also for minimizing debt, since we know that could impact their adult life for decades in negative ways. But I wouldn't choose an undergrad with the expectation that law school is of course going to be the next step. choose the undergrad for the undergrad that will be the best fit for them to learn and grow.

This is so pollyannaish. Sure you want to learn in your undergrad, but you also have to be thinking about next steps -- and if that includes grad school you don't want to crush yourself with undergrad debt.

Sure, choose the best fit -- that costs the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Going to any decent undergrad school for free is always a better choice regardless of goals. Unless you can pay for them without any kind of sacrifice- but most can’t.

Maybe all those fancy law firm bios with elite undergrad degrees just tell us that they’re from wealthy families. Which would also have connections for hiring.

Clearly you haven't worked in Biglaw. I did, for many years -- and very few lawyers were hired because of connections. They were hired because of credentials. Now, whether they got into college because of connections is an entirely different matter . . .

[Anonymous]

There is a formula for each school which generates an expected LSAT score. Do better than expected, you’re good. Do worse, it hurts. So, if you go to Dartmouth and graduate with a 3.8, the formula expects a stellar LSAT. If you score below the benchmark, you’re no good. On the other hand, go to State U, get a 3.8 and score well on the LSAT, you’ll beat expectations. That’s good. Go where you want, do well, beat you’re expected score, go to a great law school, make a lot of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Retired (praise Jesus) Biglaw (ugh) lawyer here

There is no way in hell that I'd recommend a kid or family going into debt to attend Bates over Wooster to increase the chance of T14 admissions. In fact, I wouldn't recommend going into debt to attend any college with the goal of goal to law school. No way.

Law school admissions are based almost entirely on GPA and LSAT, even at the so-called T14 level. Yale might be somewhat of an exception, because it's so small and so selective, but I wouldn't select a college based on the probability of getting admitted to Yale Law.

Actually law school admissions offices do take into account the [prestige] level of the undergrad. But I wouldn’t think that Bates would get that much credibility over Wooster. It’s not Amherst.

I work in a top 35 law school, adjacent to the admissions office. They couldn't care less where you did undergrad. That doesn't factor into US News rankings. It's all about the numbers. Every year I learn of a new college where some 1L had a 4.0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Going to any decent undergrad school for free is always a better choice regardless of goals. Unless you can pay for them without any kind of sacrifice- but most can’t.

Maybe all those fancy law firm bios with elite undergrad degrees just tell us that they’re from wealthy families. Which would also have connections for hiring.

Clearly you haven't worked in Biglaw. I did, for many years -- and very few lawyers were hired because of connections. They were hired because of credentials. Now, whether they got into college because of connections is an entirely different matter . . .

Agree. Although the best rainmakers have deep connections, some of them going back to boarding school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students who are smart and driven enough to get into a top law school we’re likely smart and driven enough to get into a top college. They don’t get into the top law school because they went to the top college. They get in because of who they have always been.

Lol
Students smart enough to earn a free ride at state U are smart enough and driven enough to go to a top law school. Because it’s who ate have always been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students who are smart and driven enough to get into a top law school we’re likely smart and driven enough to get into a top college. They don’t get into the top law school because they went to the top college. They get in because of who they have always been.

Lol
Students smart enough to earn a free ride at state U are smart enough and driven enough to go to a top law school. Because it’s who ate have always been.

I don’t think you understood what I was saying. What I said doesn’t negate what you said. I went to a top 5 law school. About half of us came from Ivies, etc. The other half didn’t. We all got to the same place, but I didn’t get there because I went to an Ivy undergrad. I got there by being the same kind of student in college that I was to get me into college.

[Anonymous]

To my knowledge Law is the only profession where even 20 years out, one lawyer will ask another - where did you go to school? And they mean both undergrad and law. And I guess, hearing from legal friends, being able to say Cornell Yale is more prestigious than saying Wooster Yale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To my knowledge Law is the only profession where even 20 years out, one lawyer will ask another - where did you go to school? And they mean both undergrad and law. And I guess, hearing from legal friends, being able to say Cornell Yale is more prestigious than saying Wooster Yale.

Not true. Law school will always matter when you're applying for a new job (which is unlike some jobs where education kind of falls off the resume after a certain level of experience), but we don't go around asking each other where we went to undergrad, let alone judging on it.