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

[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

So Yale Law is just one data point, but it is a benchmark for prestige in law and here is how this breaks down. Ivy League graduates comprise 41% of Yale Law enrollment. 4.5 Ivy graduates per 1,000 in undergraduate enrollment end up at Yale Law. If you compare this to UVA graduates, an Ivy graduate (adjusting for undergraduate enrollment) is over 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law. An Ivy graduate is 7.4X more likely than a WashU/Tufts/Emory graduate to end up at Yale Law. There is a lot of variation. A Yale grad is 34X more likely to end up at Yale Law than a UVA grad. A Cornell grad is only 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law. But the next lowest Ivy, Penn, is 5X as likely as a UVA grad. Of the three private schools mentioned by the OP, WashU is the clear leader. Its graduates are 2.5X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate. Emory does a bit better and Tufts is worse.

As someone mentioned, Yale Law is a special case, so take this with a grain of salt, but it is actual data and it probably does say something about elite law admissions.

Your calculation is wrong. You need the # of applicants to YLS per school to make that determination. You appeared to be using a wrong assumption based on the total undergraduate population.

No. A graduate of WashU is 2.5X as likely to end up at WashU as a UVA graduate based on the data available in the Yale Law bulletin. 7 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 7,540 for Wash U vs 6 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 16,331 for UVA.

You are getting at percentage of applicants admitted by school, which is a valid, but different point. There is no public data on the number of applicants by school, so that is unknowable.

I actually don't see the difference between Wash U and UVA as that significant. When you get Princeton, for instance, a Princeton graduate is 19X as likely to end up at Yale Law, and I definitely think that is significant given the desirability of Yale Law.

As I said earlier, the average WashU graduate taking the LSAT scored several points higher than the average UVA graduate. That likely has nothing to do with the quality of education and everything to do with the standardized test taking ability of the average LSAT taker from those schools. So a kid choosing between UVA an WashU would probably score the same on the LSAT regardless of where they decided to go. My opinion is that their choice between WashU and UVA would not make a significant difference in their admission odds at Yale Law. Going to Princeton (if they could get admitted) would make a difference.

You can't use the total undergraduate population to calculate admission rate. You must use the # of admitted divided by the # of applicants from that school.

Say, Washington U has 1000 students. 500 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be 2% admission rate. UVA has 2500 students. 100 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be a 10% admission rate. By your calculation, Washington U graduates would be 2.5 x likely to get in.

You didn't read carefully what the PP wrote. You are talking about something different and they specifically commented on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope. First of all, we’re not talking about graduate school in general, we are talking about law school specifically. Second, my point is that Yale has a much higher representation of Ivy League undergraduate in its law school than any other law school does, including other Ivy League law schools. I am certainly not saying that other Ivy League law schools do not have significant representation of Ivy League undergraduates.

The original poster on this point asserted that up to 50% of top law school students have undergraduate degree from the Ivy League. That is not true in the case of any law school other than Yale.

It's probably reasonably close at Harvard. They used to publish statistics of the number of kids from each undergraduate institution. Harvard was ~80 kids per class and there ~30 from YPS. The other ivies probably had 10-15 per class. In total, it could be about 40% of the class.

I wouldn't go to Tufts, Emory, or WUSTL over UVA for law school admission prospects though. The higher numbers of students from Ivies reflect test-taking aptitude and a larger percentage of students who want to go to a top law school. Law school admissions are largely GPA/LSAT driven and there are lots of students from public universities at the top law schools. There is a small GPA break for top schools, because a 3.8 at Harvard is considered more difficult than a 3.8 at Directional State, but between these schools any differences in how GPA is viewed will be pretty minor.

In short, the driving factors in this decision should be cost, size of school, location, and other cultural factors. Not law school admission prospects.

No, it probably isn't. According to its most recent on line profile, there are 173 undergrad schools represented among the 560 students in Harvard's 1L class. There are only 8 Ivy League schools. So we know at a minimum that 165 students are not Ivy League. I really doubt that 280 Harvard Law students are from the 8 Ivy League schools and the other 280 are from 165 different schools.

Harvard Law is nearly three times that size of Yale and has a much more diverse representation of undergrad schools.

Harvard used to publish this data. This is outdated, but here are some statistics that have been preserved: https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/656128-which-schools-for-harvard-law.html About 44% of the school was from Ivies + Stanford. UVA does well, BTW, which isn’t something I dispute. (I was a NP with the above post.)

Interesting post, thank you, but yes it is outdated -- almost 15 years old. I mean, they say there were 120 undergrad schools represented then, but on Harvard's current website the number is 173. That's 53 more non-Ivy League schools. And yes, you're right about UVA being well represented, as I've said all along.

I'd be stunned if today's number was 44 percent Ivy.

Because as I have said repeatedly you did not go to an ivy not did you send your child to an ivy. Having done both child graduated June 2018 I would expect the majority or at least 40% of the seats at ivy law and business schools to be filled by ivy grads. They were giving out acceptances to undergrads like popcorn. It was not uncommon at graduation to meet kids that had been admitted under the deferred admission program junior or senior year. Don’t you think the reason that The number of undergrads from each school is not supplied is because the number of schools is the more impressive number?? If it was really not insiders baseball they would state it. I think you are as dumb as all of the people who were shocked by the admissions scandal. Of course Ivy League/top law schools favor the Ivy League. Why would they not? It keeps all the schools on top and $ rolling in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope. First of all, we’re not talking about graduate school in general, we are talking about law school specifically. Second, my point is that Yale has a much higher representation of Ivy League undergraduate in its law school than any other law school does, including other Ivy League law schools. I am certainly not saying that other Ivy League law schools do not have significant representation of Ivy League undergraduates.

The original poster on this point asserted that up to 50% of top law school students have undergraduate degree from the Ivy League. That is not true in the case of any law school other than Yale.

It's probably reasonably close at Harvard. They used to publish statistics of the number of kids from each undergraduate institution. Harvard was ~80 kids per class and there ~30 from YPS. The other ivies probably had 10-15 per class. In total, it could be about 40% of the class.

I wouldn't go to Tufts, Emory, or WUSTL over UVA for law school admission prospects though. The higher numbers of students from Ivies reflect test-taking aptitude and a larger percentage of students who want to go to a top law school. Law school admissions are largely GPA/LSAT driven and there are lots of students from public universities at the top law schools. There is a small GPA break for top schools, because a 3.8 at Harvard is considered more difficult than a 3.8 at Directional State, but between these schools any differences in how GPA is viewed will be pretty minor.

In short, the driving factors in this decision should be cost, size of school, location, and other cultural factors. Not law school admission prospects.

No, it probably isn't. According to its most recent on line profile, there are 173 undergrad schools represented among the 560 students in Harvard's 1L class. There are only 8 Ivy League schools. So we know at a minimum that 165 students are not Ivy League. I really doubt that 280 Harvard Law students are from the 8 Ivy League schools and the other 280 are from 165 different schools.

Harvard Law is nearly three times that size of Yale and has a much more diverse representation of undergrad schools.

Harvard used to publish this data. This is outdated, but here are some statistics that have been preserved: https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/656128-which-schools-for-harvard-law.html About 44% of the school was from Ivies + Stanford. UVA does well, BTW, which isn’t something I dispute. (I was a NP with the above post.)

Interesting post, thank you, but yes it is outdated -- almost 15 years old. I mean, they say there were 120 undergrad schools represented then, but on Harvard's current website the number is 173. That's 53 more non-Ivy League schools. And yes, you're right about UVA being well represented, as I've said all along.

I'd be stunned if today's number was 44 percent Ivy.

Because as I have said repeatedly you did not go to an ivy not did you send your child to an ivy. Having done both child graduated June 2018 I would expect the majority or at least 40% of the seats at ivy law and business schools to be filled by ivy grads. They were giving out acceptances to undergrads like popcorn. It was not uncommon at graduation to meet kids that had been admitted under the deferred admission program junior or senior year. Don’t you think the reason that The number of undergrads from each school is not supplied is because the number of schools is the more impressive number?? If it was really not insiders baseball they would state it. I think you are as dumb as all of the people who were shocked by the admissions scandal. Of course Ivy League/top law schools favor the Ivy League. Why would they not? It keeps all the schools on top and $ rolling in.

DP . As a grad of one of the top ivy b-schools I can assure you that nowhere near 40% of my class came from ivy undergrads. My sister graduated from an ivy law school and frankly I was surprised how unremarkable most of her classmates undergrad institutions were.......again nowhere near 40%. You are oddly invested in this topic.

[Anonymous]

Cornell?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cornell?

What about Cornell? OP here. And my son wouldn't get into Cornell. His sister might but they have been flaky with our high school so likely not the ED she will choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope. First of all, we’re not talking about graduate school in general, we are talking about law school specifically. Second, my point is that Yale has a much higher representation of Ivy League undergraduate in its law school than any other law school does, including other Ivy League law schools. I am certainly not saying that other Ivy League law schools do not have significant representation of Ivy League undergraduates.

The original poster on this point asserted that up to 50% of top law school students have undergraduate degree from the Ivy League. That is not true in the case of any law school other than Yale.

It's probably reasonably close at Harvard. They used to publish statistics of the number of kids from each undergraduate institution. Harvard was ~80 kids per class and there ~30 from YPS. The other ivies probably had 10-15 per class. In total, it could be about 40% of the class.

I wouldn't go to Tufts, Emory, or WUSTL over UVA for law school admission prospects though. The higher numbers of students from Ivies reflect test-taking aptitude and a larger percentage of students who want to go to a top law school. Law school admissions are largely GPA/LSAT driven and there are lots of students from public universities at the top law schools. There is a small GPA break for top schools, because a 3.8 at Harvard is considered more difficult than a 3.8 at Directional State, but between these schools any differences in how GPA is viewed will be pretty minor.

In short, the driving factors in this decision should be cost, size of school, location, and other cultural factors. Not law school admission prospects.

Yeah I looked at the UVA Law numbers and the biggest after W&M and UVA undergrads was Dartmouth. And now just realized they have ED for law school too. Oh my. My head is spinning.

No, it probably isn't. According to its most recent on line profile, there are 173 undergrad schools represented among the 560 students in Harvard's 1L class. There are only 8 Ivy League schools. So we know at a minimum that 165 students are not Ivy League. I really doubt that 280 Harvard Law students are from the 8 Ivy League schools and the other 280 are from 165 different schools.

Harvard Law is nearly three times that size of Yale and has a much more diverse representation of undergrad schools.

Harvard used to publish this data. This is outdated, but here are some statistics that have been preserved: https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/656128-which-schools-for-harvard-law.html About 44% of the school was from Ivies + Stanford. UVA does well, BTW, which isn’t something I dispute. (I was a NP with the above post.)

Interesting post, thank you, but yes it is outdated -- almost 15 years old. I mean, they say there were 120 undergrad schools represented then, but on Harvard's current website the number is 173. That's 53 more non-Ivy League schools. And yes, you're right about UVA being well represented, as I've said all along.

I'd be stunned if today's number was 44 percent Ivy.

Because as I have said repeatedly you did not go to an ivy not did you send your child to an ivy. Having done both child graduated June 2018 I would expect the majority or at least 40% of the seats at ivy law and business schools to be filled by ivy grads. They were giving out acceptances to undergrads like popcorn. It was not uncommon at graduation to meet kids that had been admitted under the deferred admission program junior or senior year. Don’t you think the reason that The number of undergrads from each school is not supplied is because the number of schools is the more impressive number?? If it was really not insiders baseball they would state it. I think you are as dumb as all of the people who were shocked by the admissions scandal. Of course Ivy League/top law schools favor the Ivy League. Why would they not? It keeps all the schools on top and $ rolling in.

[Anonymous]

There is ED for law school now! I looked at UVA Law stats and Dartmouth had 9 in 2021, right behind UVA and W&M. Can't tell me school doesn't make a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope. First of all, we’re not talking about graduate school in general, we are talking about law school specifically. Second, my point is that Yale has a much higher representation of Ivy League undergraduate in its law school than any other law school does, including other Ivy League law schools. I am certainly not saying that other Ivy League law schools do not have significant representation of Ivy League undergraduates.

The original poster on this point asserted that up to 50% of top law school students have undergraduate degree from the Ivy League. That is not true in the case of any law school other than Yale.

It's probably reasonably close at Harvard. They used to publish statistics of the number of kids from each undergraduate institution. Harvard was ~80 kids per class and there ~30 from YPS. The other ivies probably had 10-15 per class. In total, it could be about 40% of the class.

I wouldn't go to Tufts, Emory, or WUSTL over UVA for law school admission prospects though. The higher numbers of students from Ivies reflect test-taking aptitude and a larger percentage of students who want to go to a top law school. Law school admissions are largely GPA/LSAT driven and there are lots of students from public universities at the top law schools. There is a small GPA break for top schools, because a 3.8 at Harvard is considered more difficult than a 3.8 at Directional State, but between these schools any differences in how GPA is viewed will be pretty minor.

In short, the driving factors in this decision should be cost, size of school, location, and other cultural factors. Not law school admission prospects.

No, it probably isn't. According to its most recent on line profile, there are 173 undergrad schools represented among the 560 students in Harvard's 1L class. There are only 8 Ivy League schools. So we know at a minimum that 165 students are not Ivy League. I really doubt that 280 Harvard Law students are from the 8 Ivy League schools and the other 280 are from 165 different schools.

Harvard Law is nearly three times that size of Yale and has a much more diverse representation of undergrad schools.

Harvard used to publish this data. This is outdated, but here are some statistics that have been preserved: https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/656128-which-schools-for-harvard-law.html About 44% of the school was from Ivies + Stanford. UVA does well, BTW, which isn’t something I dispute. (I was a NP with the above post.)

Interesting post, thank you, but yes it is outdated -- almost 15 years old. I mean, they say there were 120 undergrad schools represented then, but on Harvard's current website the number is 173. That's 53 more non-Ivy League schools. And yes, you're right about UVA being well represented, as I've said all along.

I'd be stunned if today's number was 44 percent Ivy.

Because as I have said repeatedly you did not go to an ivy not did you send your child to an ivy. Having done both child graduated June 2018 I would expect the majority or at least 40% of the seats at ivy law and business schools to be filled by ivy grads. They were giving out acceptances to undergrads like popcorn. It was not uncommon at graduation to meet kids that had been admitted under the deferred admission program junior or senior year. Don’t you think the reason that The number of undergrads from each school is not supplied is because the number of schools is the more impressive number?? If it was really not insiders baseball they would state it. I think you are as dumb as all of the people who were shocked by the admissions scandal. Of course Ivy League/top law schools favor the Ivy League. Why would they not? It keeps all the schools on top and $ rolling in.

Ha ha that's your argument? That you would "expect" the number at Harvard Law to be at least 40 percent simply because your kid went to an Ivy? Not a very smart, compelling -- or fact-based -- argument for an Ivy grad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nope. First of all, we’re not talking about graduate school in general, we are talking about law school specifically. Second, my point is that Yale has a much higher representation of Ivy League undergraduate in its law school than any other law school does, including other Ivy League law schools. I am certainly not saying that other Ivy League law schools do not have significant representation of Ivy League undergraduates.

The original poster on this point asserted that up to 50% of top law school students have undergraduate degree from the Ivy League. That is not true in the case of any law school other than Yale.

It's probably reasonably close at Harvard. They used to publish statistics of the number of kids from each undergraduate institution. Harvard was ~80 kids per class and there ~30 from YPS. The other ivies probably had 10-15 per class. In total, it could be about 40% of the class.

I wouldn't go to Tufts, Emory, or WUSTL over UVA for law school admission prospects though. The higher numbers of students from Ivies reflect test-taking aptitude and a larger percentage of students who want to go to a top law school. Law school admissions are largely GPA/LSAT driven and there are lots of students from public universities at the top law schools. There is a small GPA break for top schools, because a 3.8 at Harvard is considered more difficult than a 3.8 at Directional State, but between these schools any differences in how GPA is viewed will be pretty minor.

In short, the driving factors in this decision should be cost, size of school, location, and other cultural factors. Not law school admission prospects.

No, it probably isn't. According to its most recent on line profile, there are 173 undergrad schools represented among the 560 students in Harvard's 1L class. There are only 8 Ivy League schools. So we know at a minimum that 165 students are not Ivy League. I really doubt that 280 Harvard Law students are from the 8 Ivy League schools and the other 280 are from 165 different schools.

Harvard Law is nearly three times that size of Yale and has a much more diverse representation of undergrad schools.

Harvard used to publish this data. This is outdated, but here are some statistics that have been preserved: https://talk.collegeconfidential.com/law-school/656128-which-schools-for-harvard-law.html About 44% of the school was from Ivies + Stanford. UVA does well, BTW, which isn’t something I dispute. (I was a NP with the above post.)

Interesting post, thank you, but yes it is outdated -- almost 15 years old. I mean, they say there were 120 undergrad schools represented then, but on Harvard's current website the number is 173. That's 53 more non-Ivy League schools. And yes, you're right about UVA being well represented, as I've said all along.

I'd be stunned if today's number was 44 percent Ivy.

Because as I have said repeatedly you did not go to an ivy not did you send your child to an ivy. Having done both child graduated June 2018 I would expect the majority or at least 40% of the seats at ivy law and business schools to be filled by ivy grads. They were giving out acceptances to undergrads like popcorn. It was not uncommon at graduation to meet kids that had been admitted under the deferred admission program junior or senior year. Don’t you think the reason that The number of undergrads from each school is not supplied is because the number of schools is the more impressive number?? If it was really not insiders baseball they would state it. I think you are as dumb as all of the people who were shocked by the admissions scandal. Of course Ivy League/top law schools favor the Ivy League. Why would they not? It keeps all the schools on top and $ rolling in.

DP . As a grad of one of the top ivy b-schools I can assure you that nowhere near 40% of my class came from ivy undergrads. My sister graduated from an ivy law school and frankly I was surprised how unremarkable most of her classmates undergrad institutions were.......again nowhere near 40%. You are oddly invested in this topic.

Both oddly invested and flat wrong.

[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

So Yale Law is just one data point, but it is a benchmark for prestige in law and here is how this breaks down. Ivy League graduates comprise 41% of Yale Law enrollment. 4.5 Ivy graduates per 1,000 in undergraduate enrollment end up at Yale Law. If you compare this to UVA graduates, an Ivy graduate (adjusting for undergraduate enrollment) is over 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law. An Ivy graduate is 7.4X more likely than a WashU/Tufts/Emory graduate to end up at Yale Law. There is a lot of variation. A Yale grad is 34X more likely to end up at Yale Law than a UVA grad. A Cornell grad is only 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law. But the next lowest Ivy, Penn, is 5X as likely as a UVA grad. Of the three private schools mentioned by the OP, WashU is the clear leader. Its graduates are 2.5X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate. Emory does a bit better and Tufts is worse.

As someone mentioned, Yale Law is a special case, so take this with a grain of salt, but it is actual data and it probably does say something about elite law admissions.

Your calculation is wrong. You need the # of applicants to YLS per school to make that determination. You appeared to be using a wrong assumption based on the total undergraduate population.

No. A graduate of WashU is 2.5X as likely to end up at WashU as a UVA graduate based on the data available in the Yale Law bulletin. 7 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 7,540 for Wash U vs 6 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 16,331 for UVA.

You are getting at percentage of applicants admitted by school, which is a valid, but different point. There is no public data on the number of applicants by school, so that is unknowable.

I actually don't see the difference between Wash U and UVA as that significant. When you get Princeton, for instance, a Princeton graduate is 19X as likely to end up at Yale Law, and I definitely think that is significant given the desirability of Yale Law.

As I said earlier, the average WashU graduate taking the LSAT scored several points higher than the average UVA graduate. That likely has nothing to do with the quality of education and everything to do with the standardized test taking ability of the average LSAT taker from those schools. So a kid choosing between UVA an WashU would probably score the same on the LSAT regardless of where they decided to go. My opinion is that their choice between WashU and UVA would not make a significant difference in their admission odds at Yale Law. Going to Princeton (if they could get admitted) would make a difference.

You can't use the total undergraduate population to calculate admission rate. You must use the # of admitted divided by the # of applicants from that school.

Say, Washington U has 1000 students. 500 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be 2% admission rate. UVA has 2500 students. 100 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be a 10% admission rate. By your calculation, Washington U graduates would be 2.5 x likely to get in.

+1 PP makes a great case for basic statistics being a required class for everyone. Holy shit, I can't with the stupidity.

It has nothing to do with statistics. It was a matter of switching what is being measured. One was talking about admission rate and the other was simply talking about the percentage of graduates that "end up" at Yale. If someone has actual admission rates it would be great, but I don't think they are available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It has nothing to do with statistics. It was a matter of switching what is being measured. One was talking about admission rate and the other was simply talking about the percentage of graduates that "end up" at Yale. If someone has actual admission rates it would be great, but I don't think they are available.

Many schools’ career services offices publish stats. Here’s UCLA’s, for example: https://www.career.ucla.edu/Law-School-Stats

[Anonymous]

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.

DP -- this is about exactly my analysis for my kids. There are very few schools I think are worth full pay when compared to UVA (and W&M if they want a significantly smaller environment). I had a ton of school debt it just isn't worth it. I'd rather spread out the money we have saved as far as possible to help with grad or professional school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It has nothing to do with statistics. It was a matter of switching what is being measured. One was talking about admission rate and the other was simply talking about the percentage of graduates that "end up" at Yale. If someone has actual admission rates it would be great, but I don't think they are available.

Many schools’ career services offices publish stats. Here’s UCLA’s, for example: https://www.career.ucla.edu/Law-School-Stats

Of the schools mentioned here, it looks like only Emory has any specifics:

http://staging.web.emory.edu/career/documents/about/outcomes/pre_law_2018.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP -- this is about exactly my analysis for my kids. There are very few schools I think are worth full pay when compared to UVA (and W&M if they want a significantly smaller environment). I had a ton of school debt it just isn't worth it. I'd rather spread out the money we have saved as far as possible to help with grad or professional school.

+1 (as a lawyer and graduate of some of these schools).

[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:

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

So Yale Law is just one data point, but it is a benchmark for prestige in law and here is how this breaks down. Ivy League graduates comprise 41% of Yale Law enrollment. 4.5 Ivy graduates per 1,000 in undergraduate enrollment end up at Yale Law. If you compare this to UVA graduates, an Ivy graduate (adjusting for undergraduate enrollment) is over 12X as likely to end up at Yale Law. An Ivy graduate is 7.4X more likely than a WashU/Tufts/Emory graduate to end up at Yale Law. There is a lot of variation. A Yale grad is 34X more likely to end up at Yale Law than a UVA grad. A Cornell grad is only 1.6X as likely to end up at Yale Law. But the next lowest Ivy, Penn, is 5X as likely as a UVA grad. Of the three private schools mentioned by the OP, WashU is the clear leader. Its graduates are 2.5X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate. Emory does a bit better and Tufts is worse.

As someone mentioned, Yale Law is a special case, so take this with a grain of salt, but it is actual data and it probably does say something about elite law admissions.

Your calculation is wrong. You need the # of applicants to YLS per school to make that determination. You appeared to be using a wrong assumption based on the total undergraduate population.

No. A graduate of WashU is 2.5X as likely to end up at WashU as a UVA graduate based on the data available in the Yale Law bulletin. 7 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 7,540 for Wash U vs 6 Yale Law students from an undergraduate population of 16,331 for UVA.

You are getting at percentage of applicants admitted by school, which is a valid, but different point. There is no public data on the number of applicants by school, so that is unknowable.

I actually don't see the difference between Wash U and UVA as that significant. When you get Princeton, for instance, a Princeton graduate is 19X as likely to end up at Yale Law, and I definitely think that is significant given the desirability of Yale Law.

As I said earlier, the average WashU graduate taking the LSAT scored several points higher than the average UVA graduate. That likely has nothing to do with the quality of education and everything to do with the standardized test taking ability of the average LSAT taker from those schools. So a kid choosing between UVA an WashU would probably score the same on the LSAT regardless of where they decided to go. My opinion is that their choice between WashU and UVA would not make a significant difference in their admission odds at Yale Law. Going to Princeton (if they could get admitted) would make a difference.

You can't use the total undergraduate population to calculate admission rate. You must use the # of admitted divided by the # of applicants from that school.

Say, Washington U has 1000 students. 500 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be 2% admission rate. UVA has 2500 students. 100 applied for YLS and 10 got in. That would be a 10% admission rate. By your calculation, Washington U graduates would be 2.5 x likely to get in.

+1 PP makes a great case for basic statistics being a required class for everyone. Holy shit, I can't with the stupidity.

It has nothing to do with statistics. It was a matter of switching what is being measured. One was talking about admission rate and the other was simply talking about the percentage of graduates that "end up" at Yale. If someone has actual admission rates it would be great, but I don't think they are available.

The percentage of graduates that "end up" at Yale Law School doesn't tell you one school's graduate is 2.5 x likely to get in Yale. Again you have to know the percentage of graduates that apply to Yale Law School to make that determination.