Law School Discussion

How important is the Undergraduate school reputation in the admission decision

I thought about this earlier today.



not as important as major


some schools actively seek degrees from undergrads that are prestigious (EAST/WEST etc.)  not Biggie/Tupac


some schools actively seek degrees from undergrads that are prestigious (EAST/WEST etc.)  not Biggie/Tupac

For example? I've never heard of this, but it would be nice to know which schools do this....


I think that the role of the undergrad school varies across the law schools, but my best guess is that it makes the most difference if you're in the middle of the pack at a particular school. Using myself as an example (and please note I'm not making any grand claims about UPenn-- it's not even close to HYP, and I have no doubt one could get a comparable education at a ton of other schools), and I'm not trying to justify the decision making process--but I do think my 3.6 has probably been upped a tiny little notch coming from Penn. Basically, I feel like it's offered some adcomms reassurance--that I'm not a kid who can have the day of his life on the lsat but who will won't work to his potential grade-wise. But in my mind, if your grades are 3.8-4.0, it's incredibly impressive, and a 4.0 from Podunk Tech is, in my mind, superior to a 3.6 at any of thoe more "prestigious" schools.


  • *****
  • 13842
    • View Profile
    • lsn profile
Generally not much of a difference, but some law schools may place some weight on it. The dean of admissions @ UCLA was quoted by Montauk that he does place a little extra weight/gives special consideration... to grades from some of the top schools (like ivys, top publics).

I think that unless you went to one of the very top colleges/Universities, it won't matter. If you went to one of these schools for UG, it may help a LITTLE.
Attending UVa
Click below for more info
Come on, I know you want to click me.

I went to a college in England that no one in America is likely to have even heard of and was an art history major and my acceptances, holds, were right what they should have been really for my GPA and LSAT.  So I can't see that it's made any difference whatsoever.  I'm sure it helps if you went to an ivy league, but besides that it all seems about equal.
Time to commit: American
They like me: American, Loyola, Santa Clara, U of OR, U of Hawaii
They love me ($):Pepperdine, U of SF, Northeastern, Seattle, Lewis and Clark
Aren't ready to commit: U of Wisconsin, U of Maryland
B@stards won't return my calls: U of San Diego
F#ckers: Hastings


The TTTs care about this more.

I mean if you are a Harvard or Yale, any school is a TTT compared to you.

But if you are T-4, some like touting, well we have undergrads from schools G'Town, CAL, Princeton, etc etc

Not to sound like a complete dork, but before I applied to law school i read a lot on the admissions process.  And whether you like it or not, your undergraduate school is very important.  The book, "So You Want to be a Lawyer", put out by the LSAC spells it out point blank concerning admission criteria,  "...other factors--namely the undergraduate school you attended." (p. 30)  In addition(regarding choosing an undergraduate school), "You will want to enroll in a college or university that is able to stand on its own merits as an institution that will demand the best of you."  All things being equal, major, LSAT and GPA, say a 163/3.8, from a highly respected school versus someone with the same GPA from a school that had a reputation of less academic rigor, the student from the highly respected school wins all the time.  I think your undergraduate school matters when it is time to cut the pack down.