The school funded rate is actually 15 % for the c/o 2012. And for those who want to go into PI, BigLaw is not a desirable outcome. Atleast 80 percent of this group turns into full time JD required jobs . They get positions that entry level lawyers are not usually qualified for and uva pays their loans while they do their fellowship. For someone who wants to so PI, I don't see how this is not a desirable outcome
Ok, so it's 15% now - last year it was 17+%. Regardless, it's the highest among all T14s.
The problem here, first of all, is that you are assuming that these people want to do PI. I just checked LST and the C/O 2009 sent 4% into PI. Four percent. Last year (C/O 2011), UVa sent 24% into PI, thanks largely to their school-funded jobs. Doesn't it seem a bit odd to you that - assuming, like you do, that school-funded kids all want PI jobs - there has been a six-fold increase in PI-interested students that has coincided with perhaps the worst legal market in history? Quite a coincidence, I'd say.
Going by the stats alone, it seems like those that go through the program do "well," if you judge solely based on number of JD-required jobs. But unless I missed it, that article doesn't say what those JD-required jobs are. A firm with five lawyers that pays 45k a year may well be a JD-required job, but it's not gonna pay the bills and almost certainly isn't gonna qualify for UVa's LRAP.
I guess one year of dept repayment is better than no years of debt repayment (though I wonder if UVa requires 10-year participation in PI for those payments to stand), but I think this is a pretty blatant attempt at gaming the rankings, much like their hilarious yield protecting strategies (http://abovethelaw.com/2013/03/does-anybody-ever-turn-down-uva-law-or-are-they-just-gaming-their-yield-rate/
). Look, my issue is that going by USNWR's employment "numbers," UVa apparently has better employment prospects than any other school in the country. But when you actually boil the numbers down - as rayiner has done - UVa actually places near the bottom of the T14 when it comes to un-/underemployment.
First, you are obviously incapable of doing math.
How is 17% not closer to 20% than it is to 10%? Who taught you math?