brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
DanielRogers
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:34 am

brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby DanielRogers » Mon Apr 26, 2010 1:56 am

I've gotten waitlisted at brooklyn and pepperdine, haven't heard back from loyola yet, but I assume it will be the same. So I'm trying to figure out which one I should go to if I manage to get off the waitlist for more than 1 school. My numbers are 3.28/161, URM (citizen of Australia). I don't know where I want to practice after law school (either domestically or internationally), or in what field, so I guess i'm looking for the school that has the broadest general appeal.

Pepperdine--not so hyped on the conservative angle, but I know a lot of alumni who say it's not too bad. Academically, it sounds good. Highest ranked out of the three, but with the rankings at 51, 58 and 67, I don't suppose I should be too concerned about that?

Loyola--large alumni base. Haven't researched much on it, but I am impressed with its 20+ rank rise. There seems to be a growing consensus that Loyola > Pepperdine?

Brooklyn--everyone on TLS seems to hate on Brooklyn. Not so sure why. Looks like they have a reasonably impressive program. I guess they are kind of at the bottom of the list within the NYC law market, but their ranking isn't THAT bad..

I got waitlisted at Southwestern too :o . Don't know how that happened since I'm well above their median #s.

So, would love to hear opinions, except from egotistical douches that say "they all suck, you're screwed no matter what".
Last edited by DanielRogers on Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:46 am, edited 2 times in total.

byunbee
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby byunbee » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:02 am

DanielRogers wrote:I've gotten waitlisted at brooklyn and pepperdine, haven't heard back from loyola yet, but I assume it will be the same. So I'm trying to figure out which one I should go to if I manage to get off the waitlist for more than 1 school. My numbers are 3.28/161, URM (citizen of Australia). I don't know where I want to practice after law school (either domestically or internationally), or in what field, so I guess i'm looking for the school that has the broadest general appeal.


Wait, I'm a bit confused. Are you considering yourself a URM because you're a citizen of Australia or are you a URM that also happens to be a citizen of Australia?

byunbee
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby byunbee » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:09 am

Sorry if I come off a bit snarky in the above post, but I was just wondering if you could clarify. Also, I think it would be helpful if you could explain why you applied to each of these particular schools?

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

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby Danteshek » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:10 am

Southwestern clearly made the right call in this case

DanielRogers
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:34 am

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby DanielRogers » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:16 am

byunbee wrote:Sorry if I come off a bit snarky in the above post, but I was just wondering if you could clarify. Also, I think it would be helpful if you could explain why you applied to each of these particular schools?


No worries. I'm half chinese. I mentioned the Australia citizen thing I guess because it ups the diversity factor in schools, which I'm guessing works favorably for me.

Applied to brooklyn because it is in NYC (would love to live in NYC even for a few years) and because numbers wise, it seemed liked my best shot in NYC. Applied to Loyola and Pepperdine because I live in Los Angeles right now, so I've met a number of alumni from both who gave the school a thumbs up. I wouldn't mind staying around here either, but definitely not tied to it. I guess I didn't investigate too deeply when selecting the schools I applied to, my decisions were based on probability of acceptance, location and rank.

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

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby DerrickRose » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:29 am

DanielRogers wrote:No worries. I'm half chinese.


Oh boy...

byunbee
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby byunbee » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 am

DanielRogers wrote:
byunbee wrote:Sorry if I come off a bit snarky in the above post, but I was just wondering if you could clarify. Also, I think it would be helpful if you could explain why you applied to each of these particular schools?


No worries. I'm half chinese. I mentioned the Australia citizen thing I guess because it ups the diversity factor in schools, which I'm guessing works favorably for me.

Applied to brooklyn because it is in NYC (would love to live in NYC even for a few years) and because numbers wise, it seemed liked my best shot in NYC. Applied to Loyola and Pepperdine because I live in Los Angeles right now, so I've met a number of alumni from both who gave the school a thumbs up. I wouldn't mind staying around here either, but definitely not tied to it. I guess I didn't investigate too deeply when selecting the schools I applied to, my decisions were based on probability of acceptance, location and rank.


Gotcha. In terms of diversity, it sounds like you have an interesting background, but I always thought URM only referred to African/Hispanic/Native-American candidates who are traditionally underrepresented in the law school ranks. I also think that URM status is tied to race/ethnicity, I don't exactly know how law schools deal with nationality. I only say this because if you actually had URM status, you probably would've done a lot better at these schools. But I guess this is just nitpicking after the fact.

I have a friend from UG who's attending Pepperdine right now, but I can't tell you anything other than that the girls are good looking. The one thing I do know about all these schools is that they are expensive, and that you should really think about what you want to do with your law degree and where you want to practice before you decide.

byunbee
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby byunbee » Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:41 am

DerrickRose wrote:
DanielRogers wrote:No worries. I'm half chinese.


Oh boy...


LOL

DanielRogers
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:34 am

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby DanielRogers » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:00 am

byunbee wrote:
Gotcha. In terms of diversity, it sounds like you have an interesting background, but I always thought URM only referred to African/Hispanic/Native-American candidates who are traditionally underrepresented in the law school ranks. I also think that URM status is tied to race/ethnicity, I don't exactly know how law schools deal with nationality. I only say this because if you actually had URM status, you probably would've done a lot better at these schools. But I guess this is just nitpicking after the fact.

I have a friend from UG who's attending Pepperdine right now, but I can't tell you anything other than that the girls are good looking. The one thing I do know about all these schools is that they are expensive, and that you should really think about what you want to do with your law degree and where you want to practice before you decide.



Hmm you're probably right about the URM thing. All the attorneys I spoke with told me to emphasize diversity on my PS and LOCI, so I just assumed it counted as being a "URM". I guess maybe my country counts as "under represented"? :lol: anyway, back to the point of the post...

Right now I'm interested in either litigation or a possible clerkship upon graduation, but I'm kind of fickle and probably will change my mind before long, which is why I wanted the school with the broadest appeal.

byunbee
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:12 pm

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby byunbee » Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:25 am

Based on everything you've said, I would wait and retake the LSAT, and try to get into better schools or scholarship $. Here are the reasons why:

1. You don't know where you want to practice.
-None of these schools have any kind of reach outside of their respective regions.

2. You're not sure what you want to do, but you have some interest in litigation and clerkships.
-Better law schools present you with more options. You will most likely have to BUST YOUR ASS to get a clerkship out of any of these schools.

3. You are an international student, you will not be eligible for federal loans.
-Even if you do get off the WL, you will most likely be on the hook for full price.

Honestly, none of these schools offer you great career prospects, and they're all very expensive. I would advise you to retake the LSAT. If you can improve into the 165-167 range, your cycle will go noticeably better.

User avatar
PDaddy
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby PDaddy » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:21 am

DerrickRose wrote:
DanielRogers wrote:No worries. I'm half chinese.


Oh boy...


Dood. I don't know if anyone has told you this, but, full Chinese wouldn't even be considered URM for adcom purposes. If you were dirt poor and could prove it, and wrote a good essay about it, you could claim SED (SocioEconomic Disadvantage), which is almost as good. But you are not a URM. The only Asians considered URM's are those from non-Chinese or Japanese groups.

This might explain why you're getting WL'd at T2 schools with a 161 LSAT. While not stellar, it is considered to be a "solid" score, and it would put you within the top-5% (or so) of URM's. So for a URM, the score is excellent. A 161 LSAT with a B-average puts you at #25-50 if you are URM, and you would have an outside shot at the top-20. Clearly you aren't getting URM treatment. Maybe your belief that you were URM derailed your whole approach.

DanielRogers
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:34 am

Re: brooklyn v. pepperdine v. loyola

Postby DanielRogers » Mon Apr 26, 2010 4:42 am

PDaddy wrote:
DerrickRose wrote:
DanielRogers wrote:No worries. I'm half chinese.


Oh boy...


Dood. I don't know if anyone has told you this, but, full Chinese wouldn't even be considered URM for adcom purposes. If you were dirt poor and could prove it, and wrote a good essay about it, you could claim SED (SocioEconomic Disadvantage), which is almost as good. But you are not a URM. The only Asians considered URM's are those from non-Chinese or Japanese groups.

This might explain why you're getting WL'd at T2 schools with a 161 LSAT. While not stellar, it is considered to be a "solid" score, and it would put you within the top-5% (or so) of URM's. So for a URM, the score is excellent. A 161 LSAT with a B-average puts you at #25-50 if you are URM, and you would have an outside shot at the top-20. Clearly you aren't getting URM treatment. Maybe your belief that you were URM derailed your whole approach.



I was under the impression that international students were in their own "URM"-type category, but you're right, I appear to be getting the regular treatment from the adcomms.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: UVA2B and 1 guest