<p>I don’t believe it’s a violation of copyright law–it’s an archived article from over 5 years ago that is freely available and doesn’t require a subscription. And I 'm not sure one of the previous posters would find this article to be silly–it seems to be entirely on message with the theme of this thread. I hope others found it to be as interesting as I did.</p>
<p>I read the entire article/post and found it informative as well. thanks for posting it. i went to a Flagship state university undergrad and am a CFO. It is about the determination, networking and capabilities of the person that matter most unless one aspires to the Supreme court or Wall Street. I agree with whomever wrote to find a university where one can be challenged, yet perform well especially for pre-med and medical school. Important for a student to know him/herself and how to pick a university based on his/her personality, short and long term goals along with a host of other factors.</p>
<p>“I don’t believe it’s a violation of copyright law–it’s an archived article from over 5 years ago that is freely available and doesn’t require a subscription.”</p>
<p>A five year old article is fully copyright protected. In the US copyrights are in force for the life of the author plus 70 more years.</p>
<p>Without belaboring this I don’t believe that any laws have been broken for posting this article on this thread. This is probably my last post on CC anyway. Good luck everyone.</p>
<p>Keil, the computer didn’t rephrase anything. You copied only part of my sentence, leaving off the first few words - the words you did copy are still in the same order. </p>
<p>my quote: “it doesn’t look like a person has to go to a top 20 or even top 50 school to be successful or to get into a top med/business/law/grad school.”</p>
<p>You copied: “a person has to go to a top 20 or even top 50 school to be successful or to get into a top med/business/law/grad school.”</p>
<p>See…no “magical rephrasing” at all. You just accidentally didn’t copy the entire sentence. You just didn’t copy the first four words. I know you didn’t do it intentionally.</p>
<p>Physician here. Started reading posts then needed to reply regarding where physicians went to undergrad et al school. The only disadvantages of attending “podunk U” as an undergrad when applying to medical school are less weight given by admissions and possibly less learned compared to a top flagship or other good college- but that only may affect the ease in learning the basic sciences in medical school. Most physicians will have attended the schools they were accepted at- their state schools. The person who graduated last in his/her medical school is a physician as much as the top grad. All practicing physicians have to pass the required tests for licensure. The post graduate residency/specialty training is where differences come in. They tightened up on training programs decades ago so junky ones are long gone. The top medical schools do not always have the best residency programs in all specialties and different programs have strengths in different areas. This means that for certain subsets of medical problems the top experts will come out of program X, whereas for a different problem program Y will have the top experts. Ongoing/continuing medical education is required to keep a state license. Board certification in one’s specialty is an indicator of having met knowledge requirements at the time of certification. Experience also counts- it is called the practice of medicine for a reason.</p>
<p>The short answer- don’t get hung up on the schools a physician went to, their peer recommendations count more. Dr. X from country Y could be a much better physician than a local grad.</p>
<p>My addenda edit exceeded the time limit- I scanned the rest of the posts. The best neurosurgeon is the one available when you need him/her. The top one is of no use unless they are where you are when you need them. All neurosurgeons are trained to handle the majority of problems in their field. Too much awe of Harvard/Johns Hopkins medical schools- there are many others all over the country that give excellent training. The top “expert” may not have done the common procedures in a long time, whereas the local physician may be more up to date on the problem needing solving. Don’t get hung up on prestige- follow the advice of posters who suggest asking medical professionals about the physicians they work with. Do not consider celebrities as a source of knowing the best. Remember when then President Reagan was shot he was taken to the nearest, not the most prestigious, hospital to get good medical care.</p>
<p>mom2ck - That’s what I meant by my edit. The first four words of the sentence that I quoted do not significantly change the meaning of the sentence. I quoted your opinion, which is what the qualifier “it doesn’t look like” indicates, i.e. an opinion.</p>
<p>Ignore the magical rephrasing bit. That was me and my bad eyesight. But my original point still stands–whether it looks like it or not, in several cases it is true that top law schools prefer top 20/50 undergrad alma maters and in some cases will not seriously consider a candidate from a “lesser” (in their eyes) school. This is certainly not the case for grad school, and to a much lesser extent for med school, but to be blunt, elite law remains a bastion for the elite.</p>
<p>Keil, you are conflating several issues.</p>
<p>Top law schools look for two main factors-- undergrad GPA and LSAT scores. There are charts available on the internet that are highly predictive of law school admissions that show results using a grid compiled entirely of these two factors.</p>
<p>After that, in some degree of importance, come professors recommendations, “other factors” (growing up in a homeless shelter, first generation college grad, etc.), name of your undergrad, work experience, and essays. Some schools put more emphasis on these than others, but not a single law school in the country claims to weight these factors more than the big two- LSAT score and GPA.</p>
<p>So the presence of so many students at top law schools from elite undergrads proves one thing and one thing only-- the high SAT scores and HS GPA which got a kid into an elite undergrad school is reasonably predictive (but not perfectly predictive) of that same kids performance in college and on subsequent standardized tests e.g. LSAT.</p>
<p>There are always anomalies- kids from Yale who end up at Suffolk Law, and of course kids from Southern Connecticut State college who end up at Columbia Law. If you are a student at a non-elite undergrad school with top grades and top LSAT score, barring some bizarre factor (like your essay is unreadable and your professors think you are an obnoxious twit) you have a solid chance of getting into the schools your numbers would predict- regardless of where you earned your undergrad degree.</p>
<p>So the preference you observe is not a preference-- it is a statistical reality that there are more kids at Princeton or Yale who end up with top LSAT scores than kids at Southern CT State. (as you would expect by looking at the mean SAT scores of all three of these institutions.)</p>
<p>Is there a “fudge factor” used in law school admissions? Yes- but it is observable on the margins. A kid who grew up on an Indian reservation can get into a top school with slightly lower LSAT scores. A kid who majored in Engineering at Cornell can get into a top school with a slightly lower GPA (or so the rumor goes-- I’m happy to be proven wrong.) And a 30 year old who scored a 178 on the LSAT’s and took 8 years to get a BA from a college nobody ever heard of while he or she was working full time and supporting a disabled parent is likely to be looked at generously during admissions (as long as there is ample evidence that the kid has the academic chops.)</p>
<p>But these are exceptions. So all things considered, top law schools may be filled with grads from top undergrads, but that reflects the admissions standards of those schools, and not a preference for grads of those schools.</p>
<p>Well, of course GPA and LSAT are most important–just like for med school, GPA and MCAT are most important. I don’t claim to know anything about law OR med school admissions beyond what I’ve read in this thread, as I haven’t done the research–but the point has been made upthread that law schools (and, to a greater degree than the schools, law firms) exhibit a stronger preference for prestigious undergrad than do med schools. I believe this point was made based on comparisons of class composition in top law/med schools, but since I haven’t actually made such comparisons nor have I bothered to look through the last 100 posts to check, I don’t make any particular claim to being right.</p>
<p>EDIT: Skimming now through the previous posts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see a lot more evidence for law-related emphasis on prestige than for med-related.</p>