Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Texas vs. Boalt  (Read 1747 times)

gillesthegreat

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2005, 06:45:56 PM »

  Actually, we find the term 'garden' offensive. We prefer that it be refered to as a 'portal of communion with our Earth mother'.
Penn (2007)

RocketBot

  • Guest
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2005, 08:31:55 PM »
Of course, either way you go, you'll have to live with the shame of having had USC kicked your butt.

shae

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1155
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2005, 08:34:40 PM »
Yeah- I understand the difference in reputation.  I stated that twice.  I was looking for something more than "prestige"; like salaries, job placement, etc.  I know that prestige and those other things usually correlate, but I guess I donít see that in the subjective numbers.  Iím not trying to argue that Texas is better than Boalt, Iím just trying to find a good, objective (besides prestige, which is very subjective and obviously Boalt has the advantage there- but I think it is mainly because of some of their other programs than just their law school alone) argument as to why Boalt is considered so much better than Texas.

Also, why does Boalt choose to admit a weaker class than they could?  What are they looking at?  Are the denying people that are more qualified than a certain level?

-Edit: I read this after I posted it and I sound kinda hostile.  Didn't mean it like that at all.

gillesthegreat

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2005, 09:05:54 PM »
I think the best argument is probably Rockbot's. The reputation, justified or not, matters a lot, if only for the reason that the people who are hiring you are basing their decision on such things. I cannot speak for Texas, but of the few Boalt grads I know, at least one got a job in NYC for 125, defered 1 year (his choice) with a very good firm. His grades were slightly below average. I would guess that the Boalt degree is more portable than the UT degree (i.e. can find a job anywhere). But if you are really undecided, you might want to look at each school's specilaty. If the decision is that difficult for you, even the course offering might make a difference.

P.S. Don't worry too much about the hippies. The law school is up the hill and everyone knows hippies tend to go downhill.
Penn (2007)

FossilJ

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 12969
  • Carbon-date THIS, biznitch!
    • View Profile
    • Cricket Rules!
    • Email
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2005, 09:13:37 PM »
P.S. Don't worry too much about the hippies. The law school is up the hill and everyone knows hippies tend to go downhill.

Or, preferably, downwind.

Pish, J only wants to waste YOUR time.  Get wise.

shae

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1155
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #15 on: November 15, 2005, 09:38:47 PM »
kruddler- I'm sure if I decide to go there they will fall to the third tier; if I don't they will probably ascend to be ranked and regarded as the number 1 law school in the next year.

On another note
I have to say that I am very impressed with Baylor's program.  It seems superior to every other program I have seen.  Very practical and very difficult.  But, like the difference between UT and Boalt, UT's prestige carries them way over the top (deserved or not).

RocketBot

  • Guest
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #16 on: November 15, 2005, 11:40:03 PM »
Also, why does Boalt choose to admit a weaker class than they could?  What are they looking at?  Are the denying people that are more qualified than a certain level?

Yes, they do admit a weaker class intentionally, and for a reason: affirmative action is illegal in California.  So what Berkeley does is lower the bar for their entire class by effectively ignoring the LSAT-- basically all you need is a 160+ score to be considered.  The LSAT has a slight correlation with race (meaning minorities have historically scored lower on average), so Berkeley hopes to admit a more diverse class without specifically practicing affirmative action, by simply changing their overall admissions standards.

So the end effect is that, by largely eliminating the LSAT, they only use one numeric metric for admissions: GPA.

Of course, this has been absolutely disastrous for their rankings, because they've cut off half of likely attendees.  To see why, let's take a look at the three extreme types of "good" T14 candidates:

Category 1: A+ GPA, A+ LSAT
Sure to get into Harvard, Columbia, or NYU.  Admitted to Boalt, but extremely unlikely to attend.

Category 2: B+ GPA, A+ LSAT
Sure to get into Michigan, Virginia, or Penn.  Not admitted to Boalt because of aforementioned policies, but would have seriously considered attending.

Category 3: A+ GPA, B+ LSAT
Sure to get into Cornell, Duke, or UCLA.  Admitted to, and will likely to attend Boalt.

Because of their policies, Boalt only admits categories 1 and 3.  Category 1 is highly unlikely to attend, given that they will probably be admitted to a "best of the best" program (Yale, Chicago, etc.).  This is actually shown quite clearly in their LSN graph:

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/graphs.php?&cycle=3&school_code=4833

Notice the stars (which mean accepted and attending) are only on the left side.  Not a single person on the right side of the graph matriculated, because they had both a high GPA and LSAT, and thus were likely accepted into an elite program.  Also notice that almost nobody with below a 3.6 was admitted, regardless of LSAT score-- you don't see the downward slope in GPA as LSAT gets higher, as you do in every other school.  It's just a fuzzy, straight line.

The result?  Ranked #11 in USNews, Berkeley's LSAT average is 161-168.  Compare that to Fordham, ranked 16 spots lower at #27: 163-167.  UCLA, the "#2" UC school, is 163-168.

So, look again above-- Berkeley is ignoring Category 2, one of the two categories most likely to attend if admitted.  That also happens to be the category that is neither perfect across the board, nor likely to be a minority, so... ding!

...and there you have it, folks.  The admissions policy of Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley.

Groundhog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3989
    • View Profile
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #17 on: November 15, 2005, 11:43:40 PM »
I'm afraid I'm more in Category 2, despite desperately wanting to attend Boalt. Unless you really wanted to stay only in Texas, I think you'd be happer going to Boalt.

shae

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1155
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #18 on: November 15, 2005, 11:45:17 PM »
interesting! thanks for the insight.  Tricky way for them to get around the whole affirmative action thing!  Is Stanford allowed to consider race or does that law only apply to public schools in ca?

RocketBot

  • Guest
Re: Texas vs. Boalt
« Reply #19 on: November 16, 2005, 12:11:11 AM »
interesting! thanks for the insight.  Tricky way for them to get around the whole affirmative action thing!  Is Stanford allowed to consider race or does that law only apply to public schools in ca?

Only public schools/entities, so Stanford plays by their own rules.