Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

Where would you go: UIUC, Irvine, or Hastings?

Illinois (UIUC, $$)
21
21%
UC Irvine ($$)
62
62%
Hastings (trying to get $$...)
17
17%
 
Total votes: 100

User avatar
drdolittle
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby drdolittle » Sat May 01, 2010 3:22 am

pany1985 wrote:Yeah, I'm sure the community didn't benefit from the hundreds of hours of pro bono work we've already done as 1Ls. The students with summer jobs at the DA's office/PD's office/various OC courts won't be any help, that's for sure. The community probably won't benefit from our clinics in environmental law or immigration law either. Also, unless you're saying that 100% of UCI grads for the foreseeable future will be offered biglaw gigs and will actually want to take them, I would guess some people are gonna fill those lowly government jobs that people from "top" schools obviously don't like.


So you're saying Irvine won't turn out to be a top school then? Otherwise, it's hard for me to believe Irvine can unilaterally change the traditional profile of a top school by maintaining such a strong link to public interest law in arguably the richest, most money-conscious & superficial parts of CA. Not saying the good intentions are not there, but as Danteshek suggests, being a top school today and serving public interests on balance seem to be somewhat mutually exclusive, unless you look at things in very abstract terms.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby General Tso » Sat May 01, 2010 3:35 am

I think in the long term UCI will be a upper T2/lower T1 school, but these guys saying with certainty that it WILL be a T1 school as soon as it is ranked are wrong, in my opinion. How will UCI earn high reputation scores when most people still won't even have heard of it? Just look at Loyola's fiasco last year...they were on the survey as "Loyola Marymount" and not "Loyola Law School" and they tumbled in the rankings. I don't think UCI is going to be a name that jumps out at survey responders, at least not for a long time. Those are pretty static from year to year... Hastings still has a higher lawyer/judge reputation than USC!

ENGINEERD
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby ENGINEERD » Sat May 01, 2010 4:01 am

I have been following your thread really closely and I, unlike a lot of people on TLS, can understand why you are having such a hard time with this decision because I am facing pretty much the same one. Which way are you leaning??? I voted for UCI but for me it would come down to UCI and UIUC. I just cannot justify paying sticker at hastings. Between UCI and UIUC... they are so different that is makes them really hard to compare. I keep telling myself the reason we are going to school is to get jobs so make this decision based off of which school will offer you the best job prospects and for both you and I think that is UCI hands down. The problem is its a big ego check to turn down a T20(ish) school w/ $$ for a school that will more than likely be ranked in the 40-50 range.

ViP
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:53 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby ViP » Sat May 01, 2010 12:25 pm

General Tso wrote:I think in the long term UCI will be a upper T2/lower T1 school, but these guys saying with certainty that it WILL be a T1 school as soon as it is ranked are wrong, in my opinion. How will UCI earn high reputation scores when most people still won't even have heard of it? Just look at Loyola's fiasco last year...they were on the survey as "Loyola Marymount" and not "Loyola Law School" and they tumbled in the rankings. I don't think UCI is going to be a name that jumps out at survey responders, at least not for a long time. Those are pretty static from year to year... Hastings still has a higher lawyer/judge reputation than USC!


What you're saying makes sense at first glance, but consider this:

25% of US News' rankings is based on peer assessment (assessment by law school deans and administrations)
- Irvine has this is the bag. Law schools, professors, and deans have been nothing but hugely impressed and supportive (as told to me by a T20 corporate law professor, among others).

25% is based on selectivity (GPA, LSAT, acceptance rate)
- Let's assume Irvine will maintain T20 numbers (Chemerinsky already guaranteed the 2nd year class will be equal-to or stronger than the 1st year class)

20% is based on bar passage rate
- Hardly the reason people think UCI will suffer in the rankings... I don't think anyone fears that Chem and the great faculty won't prepare UCI students well enough for the bar)

15% is based on faculty resources (expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, library resources)
- This won't be bringing down UCI's ranking

That equates to 85% that works in favor of UCI being T20, by my calculations. You can argue the extent to which I think UCI will do well with the above, but I don't see how anything listed above will really hurt UCI's potential in the rankings...

The final 15% is for assessment scores by lawyers/judges. Those that are familiar with UCI are likely to give them decent scores, at worst. Those that don't know UCI simply will decline to answer. They won't give them negative marks if they've never heard of them. Loyola suffered because even those that know and love Loyola didn't know how to answer because they didn't recognize the name "Loyola Marymount" as the Loyola they know.

Even if that final 15% hurts UCI more than I expect, it will detract from T20 status (again, according to my breakdown above). Fine. So the school will be T25, T30, T40, depending on your pessimism. But can you really imagine the school, with everything listed above, not being in the first tier? Can you imagine a school with median numbers like 167/3.6 and a Top-9 faculty landing beyond 50 in the superficial rankings?

EDIT: Also wanted to mention that if lawyer/judge assessment were so powerful, then Hastings would dominate by US News standards... I think that's the best thing Hastings offers, in fact (given its history). Doesn't look like it's helping them much, though, considering their entering numbers are better than the school's ranking suggests and yet they still slip...

User avatar
pany1985
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby pany1985 » Sat May 01, 2010 1:56 pm

drdolittle wrote:
pany1985 wrote:Yeah, I'm sure the community didn't benefit from the hundreds of hours of pro bono work we've already done as 1Ls. The students with summer jobs at the DA's office/PD's office/various OC courts won't be any help, that's for sure. The community probably won't benefit from our clinics in environmental law or immigration law either. Also, unless you're saying that 100% of UCI grads for the foreseeable future will be offered biglaw gigs and will actually want to take them, I would guess some people are gonna fill those lowly government jobs that people from "top" schools obviously don't like.


So you're saying Irvine won't turn out to be a top school then? Otherwise, it's hard for me to believe Irvine can unilaterally change the traditional profile of a top school by maintaining such a strong link to public interest law in arguably the richest, most money-conscious & superficial parts of CA. Not saying the good intentions are not there, but as Danteshek suggests, being a top school today and serving public interests on balance seem to be somewhat mutually exclusive, unless you look at things in very abstract terms.


I'm not saying it won't become a top school. What I am saying is that it's ridiculous to think the community won't benefit as a result.

Once it's fully expanded, UCI will have about 600 students total, nearly all of them doing pro bono work during each of their three years. Over half our class has already done 20 hours or more during spring semester of our 1L year, but let's aim low and say the average student only does about 80 hours during their 3 years. That's 16,000 hours of community service per incoming class. Clinics are required for all 3Ls, so that number will actually be much higher.

As far as saying "Southwestern and Loyola are better for the community because they put more people into DA/PD/etc.", I just don't believe that's true. It's not as if those schools exist for philanthropic purposes. I'm sure if their grads could get higher-paying jobs, they would. When you're forced into "public service" because you can't find a better job, I don't really see that as a terribly noble pursuit. You're just taking what you can get.

Danteshek
Posts: 2172
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby Danteshek » Sat May 01, 2010 2:07 pm

Community service while you're in law school means squat (coming from someone who volunteered over 50 hours this year). What matters is what you do after. It's also terribly presumptuous to assume that Loyola and Southwestern grads serve the public because they can't find other jobs. But that attitude is exactly what I would expect from a student at a "top" school.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby General Tso » Sat May 01, 2010 2:07 pm

Why do you assume that their peer assessment will be so high? Just because of Chem? As far as I can see, many UCLA and other UC professors are openly hostile towards UCI. Plus, this is supposed to be reflective of the kind of scholarly product the school is outputting...will they really have made huge scholarly contributions over the next 5 years? Will they have a noteworthy flagship journal, for instance?

I think as long as they keep their class size capped at under 100 students they shouldnt have a problem keeping Hastings/Davis type numbers, but I don't see them attracting "T20" type numbers unless they keep up the half to full scholarships. That's good for the students who attend there, but likely to continue drawing ire from peers who are watching Regents' money squandered on an ego contest.

I really think people should listen to the UCSD MBA guy...they took the exact same approach as UCI law, started in 2001, and still aren't in the top 50 mba programs.

The things killing Hastings are employment rate (which at least they are honest about-69% at graduation), student:faculty ratio, and expenditures per student. Hastings is incapable of leeching off of a flagship university as others do. If you take out these nonsensical factors (employment is only nonsensical because half the schools are dishonest, and expenditures per student..what does that even mean? the school should rank higher because these people got new desks and free pizza more often???), Hastings would be #32 (as it was in this year's Helmholtz rankings).

keg411
Posts: 5935
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby keg411 » Sat May 01, 2010 2:09 pm

Why should UCI be faulted for wanting to become a top school? It should be the goal for the administration to make it another UCLA. Why would you want mediocrity? Aiming for mediocrity is accepting TTT-ness. I'm also sure more than half of students at Southwestern/Loyola/Pepperdine wish they could have gone to UCLA/USC/Berk because there are more career options out of the top schools (whether it be PI or corporate firm work). Doesn't UCLA have a very strong PI program?

I'm also very pro-state school, and since OP wanted the Bay area, it makes sense to pick Hastings. But for those looking for SoCal, I certainly think UCI is an intriguing option. FTR, I applied to zero schools in California and have no horse in this race (although I do, in general have a pro-state school >> private school bias outside of the T14).

User avatar
pany1985
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby pany1985 » Sat May 01, 2010 2:11 pm

Danteshek wrote:Community service while you're in law school means squat (coming from someone who volunteered over 50 hours this year). What matters is what you do after. It's also terribly presumptuous to assume that Loyola and Southwestern grads serve the public because they can't find other jobs. But that attitude is exactly what I would expect from a student at a "top" school.


Isn't the assumption I'm making the same one you're making; that students from highly-ranked schools will take high-paying jobs rather than low-paying PI/gov't work? I'm just looking at that same assumption the opposite way; that students from low-ranked schools will be unable to get the high-paying jobs and will take low-paying PI/gov't work instead.

Please note that I don't think the first assumption is true, so you can probably figure out that I don't 100% believe the latter either.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby General Tso » Sat May 01, 2010 2:11 pm

keg411 wrote:Why should UCI be faulted for wanting to become a top school? It should be the goal for the administration to make it another UCLA. Why would you want mediocrity? Aiming for mediocrity is accepting TTT-ness. I'm also sure more than half of students at Southwestern/Loyola/Pepperdine wish they could have gone to UCLA/USC/Berk because there are more career options out of the top schools (whether it be PI or corporate firm work). Doesn't UCLA have a very strong PI program?

I'm also very pro-state school, and since OP wanted the Bay area, it makes sense to pick Hastings. But for those looking for SoCal, I certainly think UCI is an intriguing option. FTR, I applied to zero schools in California and have no horse in this race (although I do, in general have a pro-state school >> private school bias outside of the T14).


I think UCI will be a great school, and I often tell people to choose it. If I were in OP's position I'd probably take the money as well. I don't take issue with their aspirations...I just think it's hasty to assume they will definitely be T1 ASAP as many of the people here seem to think.

Danteshek
Posts: 2172
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby Danteshek » Sat May 01, 2010 2:39 pm

My point is that UCI must justify its existence by emphasizing its value to the community. That argument is complete bullshit, because UCI's main objective is to be a top school, not to be a school that serves the community. CUNY in NYC is a school that serves the community. UCI's schtick is utterly hypocritical. If UCI really cared about serving the community, they would not care about the school's rank.

User avatar
pany1985
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby pany1985 » Sat May 01, 2010 2:42 pm

Okay then. I'll go with "agree to disagree" on this one.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby General Tso » Sat May 01, 2010 2:49 pm

pany1985 wrote:Okay then. I'll go with "agree to disagree" on this one.


in other words, pwnd by Dante :lol:

It doesn't quite make sense to me either. Most top applicants, especially those who care about USNWR, are going to be gunning for biglaw or at least something private sector. Even if you are a PI-minded top applicant who cares about ranking, there are plenty of top schools that already offer excellent LRAP programs. So what's the point of UCI's existence then, if their only justification for themselves is public interest? And why the focus on USNWR?

They should drop the crap and honestly state their intentions. Honestly that sounds like a load of hooey they sold to the legislature to get their funding approved. 20 bucks says they drop the "community" shtick as soon as their new law building goes up.

User avatar
DerrickRose
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby DerrickRose » Sat May 01, 2010 3:04 pm

General Tso wrote:It doesn't quite make sense to me either. Most top applicants, especially those who care about USNWR, are going to be gunning for biglaw or at least something private sector. Even if you are a PI-minded top applicant who cares about ranking, there are plenty of top schools that already offer excellent LRAP programs. So what's the point of UCI's existence then, if their only justification for themselves is public interest? And why the focus on USNWR?

They should drop the crap and honestly state their intentions. Honestly that sounds like a load of hooey they sold to the legislature to get their funding approved. 20 bucks says they drop the "community" shtick as soon as their new law building goes up.


I don't think the two goals are mutually exclusive. When UCI talks about public service, I think they are speaking more in terms of AUSA, ACLU, DoJ type public service rather than podunk assistant public defender public service. Not that the latter is any less admirable, but you aren't going to get the big stuff unless you're a top school.

And with regard to the person who brought up CUNY, I hardly think adding dozens of debt-ridden people per year to the unemployment lines can be considered a "public service"

User avatar
pany1985
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby pany1985 » Sat May 01, 2010 3:08 pm

Where is this "UCI's only justification for existing is public interest" thing coming from? I don't think anyone has ever said that. I would say that UCI's existence is more about shaking up the traditional law school model, with more of a focus on practical skills and hands-on training to help students be better lawyers. Also, UCI will have the best LRAP in the country, so if people want to do PI they will certainly have the opportunity.


Anyway, I have a date with a take-home (which is why I decided to stop debating the issue).

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby Blindmelon » Sat May 01, 2010 3:23 pm

I agree that I don't think UCI will be a purely PI school - they're unaccredited so students won't be eligible for any federal government work (DOJ, SEC, etc). So much of the most prestigious PI won't be available to UCI students.

ViP
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:53 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby ViP » Sat May 01, 2010 4:17 pm

General Tso wrote:
pany1985 wrote:Okay then. I'll go with "agree to disagree" on this one.


in other words, pwnd by Dante :lol:

It doesn't quite make sense to me either. Most top applicants, especially those who care about USNWR, are going to be gunning for biglaw or at least something private sector. Even if you are a PI-minded top applicant who cares about ranking, there are plenty of top schools that already offer excellent LRAP programs. So what's the point of UCI's existence then, if their only justification for themselves is public interest? And why the focus on USNWR?

They should drop the crap and honestly state their intentions. Honestly that sounds like a load of hooey they sold to the legislature to get their funding approved. 20 bucks says they drop the "community" shtick as soon as their new law building goes up.


First of all, I have to clarify that UCI is NOT trying to be a "public interest only" school. They want to emphasize public interest during school in order to remind the students of why the field of law exists (their words- more or less- not mine). Obviously, as evidenced by ASD, Chem and others are determined to make its students the best possible lawyers, period. Plenty of perspective students raised the PI-only concern and Chem answered accordingly, stating that his students will be great lawyers from the moment they graduate, regardless of the field they practice in.

And it's appalling to me that you guys think there's some sort of exclusionary relationship between PI and being a "top" school. It makes absolutely no sense when you say "why the focus" on US News, and "drop the crap." First off, Chem's reason for saying UCI will be a top school is that its students will be among the nation's best, and its faculty will be among the nation's best. Period. Who says "top" equates to "big-law"? UCI certainly never said that. Are the "top schools" not clearly distinguished by the quality of their students and faculty?

According to you, UCI shouldn't focus on being a top school (i.e. top students and top faculty) because they like to emphasize PI... Does that really make sense to you?

...because the alternative would be Chem saying "we have no intention of being a top school." Is this the approach PI-focused schools should take?

Being in the company of top-notch, accomplished students and faculty is prestigious. Why wouldn't top students want to be part of such a thing?

User avatar
sanpiero
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:09 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby sanpiero » Sat May 01, 2010 4:28 pm

UIUC is out for the reason stated above. Sounds like you want to go to UCI. I would, too.

User avatar
calapp09
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:41 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby calapp09 » Sat May 01, 2010 5:09 pm

Blindmelon wrote:I agree that I don't think UCI will be a purely PI school - they're unaccredited so students won't be eligible for any federal government work (DOJ, SEC, etc). So much of the most prestigious PI won't be available to UCI students.


I'm working for the DOJ for the summer, and the Director of the Homeland Security Honors Program/ former Director of the DOJ Honors Program recently came to UCI for a recruitment workshop to encourage us to think about applying.

User avatar
drdolittle
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby drdolittle » Sat May 01, 2010 5:21 pm

ViP wrote:First of all, I have to clarify that UCI is NOT trying to be a "public interest only" school. They want to emphasize public interest during school in order to remind the students of why the field of law exists (their words- more or less- not mine). Obviously, as evidenced by ASD, Chem and others are determined to make its students the best possible lawyers, period. Plenty of perspective students raised the PI-only concern and Chem answered accordingly, stating that his students will be great lawyers from the moment they graduate, regardless of the field they practice in.

And it's appalling to me that you guys think there's some sort of exclusionary relationship between PI and being a "top" school. It makes absolutely no sense when you say "why the focus" on US News, and "drop the crap." First off, Chem's reason for saying UCI will be a top school is that its students will be among the nation's best, and its faculty will be among the nation's best. Period. Who says "top" equates to "big-law"? UCI certainly never said that. Are the "top schools" not clearly distinguished by the quality of their students and faculty?

According to you, UCI shouldn't focus on being a top school (i.e. top students and top faculty) because they like to emphasize PI... Does that really make sense to you?

...because the alternative would be Chem saying "we have no intention of being a top school." Is this the approach PI-focused schools should take?

Being in the company of top-notch, accomplished students and faculty is prestigious. Why wouldn't top students want to be part of such a thing?


I'm a 0L so admittedly I'm basing my opinions on limited info. The way I see it, the issue is not so much the intentions of Irvine's admin, faculty and students, or their quality. I have no reason to doubt that most people attracted to the school have a strong appreciation of public interest law and serving the community in general. But the reality is that most top law schools end up catering to money. Without fail, rankings mirror the percentage of grads going into biglaw, and this shows that despite good intentions, for whatever reason, a large number of grads from top schools end up targeting the highest paying jobs. So the point remains that unless Irvine can be the single exception to this, as a top school it will effectively end up some ways away from its current pitch of having a unique public interest/socially conscious program. This, by the way, would be completely expected since Irvine was evidently started with such generous support from the local "community" (i.e. law firms & businesses). I think some critics have simply pointed out the apparent hypocrisy of Irvine's pitch given its stated goal of becoming a top school. That's been the debate, not the quality of faculty and students, or the educational environment, at least for now.

User avatar
Blindmelon
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby Blindmelon » Sat May 01, 2010 5:51 pm

calapp09 wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:I agree that I don't think UCI will be a purely PI school - they're unaccredited so students won't be eligible for any federal government work (DOJ, SEC, etc). So much of the most prestigious PI won't be available to UCI students.


I'm working for the DOJ for the summer, and the Director of the Homeland Security Honors Program/ former Director of the DOJ Honors Program recently came to UCI for a recruitment workshop to encourage us to think about applying.


Thats really weird given that they require applicants to be from ABA accredited schools. Weird.

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby 20160810 » Sat May 01, 2010 5:57 pm

Hastings is TCR given these responses, but I'm gonna say Borhas' "Did you apply to Davis?" was TCQ.

I'll be sold on Irvine when they maintain their #s after they stop throwing $$$ at everyone who picks them over other schools. I also don't think it will happen, but time will tell.

Danteshek
Posts: 2172
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby Danteshek » Sat May 01, 2010 6:03 pm

calapp09 wrote:
Blindmelon wrote:I agree that I don't think UCI will be a purely PI school - they're unaccredited so students won't be eligible for any federal government work (DOJ, SEC, etc). So much of the most prestigious PI won't be available to UCI students.


I'm working for the DOJ for the summer, and the Director of the Homeland Security Honors Program/ former Director of the DOJ Honors Program recently came to UCI for a recruitment workshop to encourage us to think about applying.


Will you be in DC this summer?

UCLA1LHopeful
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby UCLA1LHopeful » Sun May 02, 2010 1:01 pm

Danteshek wrote:[strike]My point is that UCI must justify its existence by emphasizing its value to the community. That argument is complete bullshit, because UCI's main objective is to be a top school, not to be a school that serves the community. CUNY in NYC is a school that serves the community. UCI's schtick is utterly hypocritical. If UCI really cared about serving the community, they would not care about the school's rank.
[/strike]

Have fun at Southwestern's unemployment line!

User avatar
20160810
Posts: 19648
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 1:18 pm

Re: Illinoic (UIUC, $$) vs. UC Irvine ($$) vs. Hastings

Postby 20160810 » Sun May 02, 2010 3:00 pm

UCLA1LHopeful wrote:
Danteshek wrote:[strike]My point is that UCI must justify its existence by emphasizing its value to the community. That argument is complete bullshit, because UCI's main objective is to be a top school, not to be a school that serves the community. CUNY in NYC is a school that serves the community. UCI's schtick is utterly hypocritical. If UCI really cared about serving the community, they would not care about the school's rank.
[/strike]

Have fun at Southwestern's unemployment line!


Have fun being a banned douche!




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sdancer89, SweetTort and 3 guests