Blindmelon wrote:1800calturk wrote:im_blue wrote:+1, not to mention the fact that law school prestige is probably more important than B-school prestige, since MBA hiring also takes into account connections and work experience.
I have a completely distorted perception of the prestige of Irvine. From some people I'm hearing that it has no chance and will eventually land in the T50 if it's lucky, then you have Chemerinsky & Co. assuring us (and putting his reputation on the fact) that it will be a T20 "in any capacity the first time it is ranked". What does the legal community really think? From lay-perspective, USC undergrad is clearly superior to Irvine, does that matter?
You know that in order to be a T20 it has to overtake well established schools. There is no imaginable way that it could overtake UCLA/USC and extremely doubtful that it could overtake BU, Emory or WUSTL, or even GW, BC or Fordham... schools that have been around for a long time and have a great reputation in the legal field.
Very true. I think it's silly to try to predict exactly where Irvine will fall in its US News debut. However, we all know that the rankings are very superficial. If the numbers add up, you hit the jackpot.
If Irvine indeed keeps the median numbers as high or higher as the first-year numbers, if the school manages to maintain a competitive acceptance rate (not the deceiving 4% of last year, but realistic), and if the first-year class nails employment upon graduation, you have the formula for a great US News debut. These are hardly impossible to achieve, by the way.
Judge/Lawyer assessment will be negligible because they don't have enough info to answer positively or negatively. Peer assessment (deriving from law school deans and administrations) however, is likely to be very strong considering the high prestige that Chemerinsky and his faculty have in the world of law schools.