The Future of UCI

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
whereskyle
Posts: 713
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:37 am

The Future of UCI

Postby whereskyle » Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:25 am

Can anyone comment with a reasonable view on the future of UC Irvine? Does the school's faculty really maintain such connections to keep a clerkship powerhouse churning? Was it all a three year fluke? Where do you expect them to be in four years? Where could they (best case scenario) be in four years? Thanks, all. Maybe there's a redirect here. I just want to hear some opinions.

BigZuck
Posts: 10873
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby BigZuck » Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:56 am

I think it will be a school ranked solidly in the 30s-40s with the employment outcomes of most schools that lie in that range.

I also think we need to have more threads devoted to this school, there is not anywhere close to enough discussion about UCI on this site.

User avatar
DoveBodyWash
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 4:12 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby DoveBodyWash » Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:36 am

tag

User avatar
Meepo
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Meepo » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:15 pm

#78

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby hephaestus » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:18 pm

Their rank decidedly does not matter.
We will have to wait for more employment data to see if it's a one year anomaly or a good CA option.

User avatar
drmguy
Posts: 1016
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:43 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby drmguy » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:18 pm

I'll bet a dollar it will be ranked higher than this new one.

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3153
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby twenty » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:40 pm

They end up in the 20's, but only if they continue dishing out some SERIOUS money.

whereskyle
Posts: 713
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:37 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby whereskyle » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:54 pm

I'm specifically interested in clerkship placement. I feel that if I can go for free and have as good of a shot at landing a fed clerkship as schools twice as expensive, then I would be foolish not to pursue it. But, is the consensus that these clerkship numbers are doomed, or are they viable based purely on faculty connections (as opposed to perceived student quality, which we would expect to decline giving the expanding classes)?

BigZuck
Posts: 10873
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:53 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby BigZuck » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:56 pm

whereskyle wrote:I'm specifically interested in clerkship placement. I feel that if I can go for free and have as good of a shot at landing a fed clerkship as schools twice as expensive, then I would be foolish not to pursue it. But, is the consensus that these clerkship numbers are doomed, or are they viable based purely on faculty connections (as opposed to perceived student quality, which we would expect to decline giving the expanding classes)?


I don't see how that could possibly be sustainable with a growing class size.

whereskyle
Posts: 713
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:37 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby whereskyle » Mon Apr 15, 2013 5:58 pm

BigZuck wrote:
whereskyle wrote:I'm specifically interested in clerkship placement. I feel that if I can go for free and have as good of a shot at landing a fed clerkship as schools twice as expensive, then I would be foolish not to pursue it. But, is the consensus that these clerkship numbers are doomed, or are they viable based purely on faculty connections (as opposed to perceived student quality, which we would expect to decline giving the expanding classes)?


I don't see how that could possibly be sustainable with a growing class size.


True, -1 on LR for whereskyle.

User avatar
bananasplit19
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby bananasplit19 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:12 pm

whereskyle wrote:I'm specifically interested in clerkship placement. I feel that if I can go for free and have as good of a shot at landing a fed clerkship as schools twice as expensive, then I would be foolish not to pursue it. But, is the consensus that these clerkship numbers are doomed, or are they viable based purely on faculty connections (as opposed to perceived student quality, which we would expect to decline giving the expanding classes)?

According to LST, 28.6% of the inaugural class ended up with a federal clerkship. A couple of stragglers picked up Chemerinsky-fueled clerkships after the cutoff, which puts the number north of 30%. Now, here's where we have to speculate. Some believe that the number of clerkships offered to UCI grads will go up as the first wave of alums succeed. Some believe that the number will go down as the novelty of the new school wears off. No one knows, obviously, so let's split the difference and say it'll stay even. In other words, let's say UCI, no matter how big class sizes get, will score ~15-17 federal clerkships per year.

Class size for 2016 will be around 120 (just over twice as big as the inaugural class), and they state they will keep it that way for the next few years, slowly ballooning it up to 200 or so over the next ten years. That puts UCI's expected clerkship rate to be 12-15% over the next few years, which is pretty gaudy. Even if you think that's optimistic and drop it to 10% (ie 12 clerkships per year instead of 15-17), that's still head and shoulders above the rest of the non-T14 pack, percentage-wise.

Anyone spot any gaping holes in my assumptions or logic? Or am I misreading the federal clerkship stat on LST?

User avatar
sportsaholic763
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 1:59 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby sportsaholic763 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:22 pm

tag

PRgradBYU
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:04 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby PRgradBYU » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:50 pm

Paging Dr. Dre.

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby rickgrimes69 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 6:52 pm

bananasplit19 wrote:
whereskyle wrote:I'm specifically interested in clerkship placement. I feel that if I can go for free and have as good of a shot at landing a fed clerkship as schools twice as expensive, then I would be foolish not to pursue it. But, is the consensus that these clerkship numbers are doomed, or are they viable based purely on faculty connections (as opposed to perceived student quality, which we would expect to decline giving the expanding classes)?

According to LST, 28.6% of the inaugural class ended up with a federal clerkship. A couple of stragglers picked up Chemerinsky-fueled clerkships after the cutoff, which puts the number north of 30%. Now, here's where we have to speculate. Some believe that the number of clerkships offered to UCI grads will go up as the first wave of alums succeed. Some believe that the number will go down as the novelty of the new school wears off. No one knows, obviously, so let's split the difference and say it'll stay even. In other words, let's say UCI, no matter how big class sizes get, will score ~15-17 federal clerkships per year.

Class size for 2016 will be around 120 (just over twice as big as the inaugural class), and they state they will keep it that way for the next few years, slowly ballooning it up to 200 or so over the next ten years. That puts UCI's expected clerkship rate to be 12-15% over the next few years, which is pretty gaudy. Even if you think that's optimistic and drop it to 10% (ie 12 clerkships per year instead of 15-17), that's still head and shoulders above the rest of the non-T14 pack, percentage-wise.

Anyone spot any gaping holes in my assumptions or logic? Or am I misreading the federal clerkship stat on LST?


Your biggest problem is in assuming that the successful alums will somehow create opportunities for future alums. They won't be in a position to do that for 5-10 years, and even then, the small class size makes it tough for an alumni network to propagate and provide any real value.

The clerkship numbers UCI posted are laughably unsustainable, and likely resulted from every faculty member calling in every favor they had. There's no way to know if those favors will still be around next year, or the year after, or five years from now, but I think we can all agree that it's unlikely. And with a growing class size, it will get even more difficult.

Is it possible that in 10 years they place 10% into Fed Clerkships? Sure. But a 10% shot at a positive outcome might as well be no shot at all, and there's no reason to think the other 90% of the class will have a non-negligible shot at Biglaw to make up for the reduced clerkship placement.

Bottom line: we don't know. But we do know that the market sucks, with no indications of turning around, and yet somehow a brand new school nearly beat Yale last year in clerkship placement. That wasn't organic; that was a manufactured, carefully structured outcome that I have little faith in UCI's ability to recreate.

User avatar
bananasplit19
Posts: 686
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:53 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby bananasplit19 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:20 pm

Thanks for the thought-out response, Grimey. I have some follow-up questions, if you don't mind:

rickgrimes69 wrote:Your biggest problem is in assuming that the successful alums will somehow create opportunities for future alums. They won't be in a position to do that for 5-10 years, and even then, the small class size makes it tough for an alumni network to propagate and provide any real value.

But this year's class didn't have any alumni connections and still managed to swing 20 clerkships. I understand the importance of an alumni network, but it seems to me (and granted, I'm a 0L that knows little about the process) that the road to these positions were faculty-driven (as you mention below), so wouldn't any alumni-driven connections just be additional added value, at least for the next few years?

rickgrimes69 wrote:The clerkship numbers UCI posted are laughably unsustainable, and likely resulted from every faculty member calling in every favor they had. There's no way to know if those favors will still be around next year, or the year after, or five years from now, but I think we can all agree that it's unlikely. And with a growing class size, it will get even more difficult.

Why is it unlikely that these favors will still be around in the future? Is there some secret arm-twisting that the UCI faculty is using to coerce federal judges this year? Unless this year's crop of UCI grads prove to be lazy and poor clerks, is there a reason for judges and courts to cap it as a one-off experiment and shut UCI out? I'll agree that we don't know for sure, but I can't agree that UCI's numbers (not percentages) are unlikely to stay constant. To that end, I've attempted to account for the growing class size by calculating by net clerkships, not percentage of the class getting these gigs.

rickgrimes69 wrote:Is it possible that in 10 years they place 10% into Fed Clerkships? Sure. But a 10% shot at a positive outcome might as well be no shot at all, and there's no reason to think the other 90% of the class will have a non-negligible shot at Biglaw to make up for the reduced clerkship placement.

Bottom line: we don't know. But we do know that the market sucks, with no indications of turning around, and yet somehow a brand new school nearly beat Yale last year in clerkship placement. That wasn't organic; that was a manufactured, carefully structured outcome that I have little faith in UCI's ability to recreate.

No one, not even Chemerinsky after a bottle of wine, believes UCI will be anywhere close to HYS. But the 10% Fed Clerkship number (and if you apply the same logic to proportionately reduce UCI's BigLaw numbers with their increased class size) are consistent with or greater than schools in the 15-19 range. And wouldn't that be considered a rousing success story, and a good deal if you get disproportionate scholly money out of them?

I have a degree in economics, and one of the classic jokes in our department involves an economist walking past a $100 bill on the ground because he assumes someone would have picked it up already. Could this be a similar story? It seems too good to be true for a new school to succeed in the sewage plant we laughingly call the CA legal market. But it seems to be it would be foolish to not at least inspect the $100 bill before writing it off as an illusion and walking past it, no?

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby rickgrimes69 » Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:50 pm

bananasplit19 wrote:But this year's class didn't have any alumni connections and still managed to swing 20 clerkships. I understand the importance of an alumni network, but it seems to me (and granted, I'm a 0L that knows little about the process) that the road to these positions were faculty-driven (as you mention below), so wouldn't any alumni-driven connections just be additional added value, at least for the next few years?


They would be added value, if they were in a capacity to add value. No UCI grad will be in a position to hire directly for at least several years. Their alumni networking potential in general is severely handicapped by a lack of well, alumni, and UCI's small class size means it will take a long time for their ranks to grow.

Why is it unlikely that these favors will still be around in the future? Is there some secret arm-twisting that the UCI faculty is using to coerce federal judges this year? Unless this year's crop of UCI grads prove to be lazy and poor clerks, is there a reason for judges and courts to cap it as a one-off experiment and shut UCI out? I'll agree that we don't know for sure, but I can't agree that UCI's numbers (not percentages) are unlikely to stay constant. To that end, I've attempted to account for the growing class size by calculating by net clerkships, not percentage of the class getting these gigs.


There's no reason not to assume that at least some UCI grads will be lazy, or poor clerks. And it's dangerous, and a bit presumptuous, to assume that a favor exists in perpetuity. It's not like Federal Clerkship spots are growing on trees, and there are lots of schools in CA fighting for them.

No one, not even Chemerinsky after a bottle of wine, believes UCI will be anywhere close to HYS. But the 10% Fed Clerkship number (and if you apply the same logic to proportionately reduce UCI's BigLaw numbers with their increased class size) are consistent with or greater than schools in the 15-19 range. And wouldn't that be considered a rousing success story, and a good deal if you get disproportionate scholly money out of them?


Let's assume you're right, and they can put 10% into Fed. Clerkships. As I said, it's silly to go to school with a 10% shot at a positive outcome, so how did the private practice folks do? UCI placed 13 grads into firms 100+. With a class of 200, that's a 6.5% shot at mid/biglaw. Even if we get generous and assume they can place twice as many kids (26), that's 13%. Combined with our 10% shot at Federal Clerkships, you're left with about a ~25% chance at a positive outcome. Not great odds when UCI stops letting kids in for free and starts charging through the nose.

I have a degree in economics, and one of the classic jokes in our department involves an economist walking past a $100 bill on the ground because he assumes someone would have picked it up already. Could this be a similar story? It seems too good to be true for a new school to succeed in the sewage plant we laughingly call the CA legal market. But it seems to be it would be foolish to not at least inspect the $100 bill before writing it off as an illusion and walking past it, no?


There's a difference between inspecting an $100 bill and investing your life savings and future earning potential in the proposition that it's not counterfeit.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:10 am

PRgradBYU wrote:Paging Dr. Dre.



Thanks.



OP, UCI law will remain TTTT. STop speculating.

User avatar
Cobretti
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:45 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Cobretti » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:14 am

Dr. Dre wrote:
PRgradBYU wrote:Paging Dr. Dre.



Thanks.



OP, UCI law will remain TTTT. STop speculating.

I don't get how a 167/3.7 is bashing UCI, shouldn't they be your target?

chadbrochill
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:19 am

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby chadbrochill » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:16 am

Gotta love Dre. answering the batsignal :lol:

Dre is URM i think?

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:17 am

Cobretti wrote:I don't get how a 167/3.7 is bashing UCI, shouldn't they be your target?



I'm retaking


and UCI's numbers are falling dramatically, i guess they can't pull off what they did with their 1st year class

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:18 am

chadbrochill wrote:
Dre is URM i think?



yes i am

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Nova » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:19 am

Cobretti wrote:
Dr. Dre wrote:

Thanks.



OP, UCI law will remain TTTT. STop speculating.

I don't get how a 167/3.7 is bashing UCI, shouldn't they be your target?

Dre is easily one of the top 50 AA applicants next cycle.

But anyway... this UCI topic comes up a lot. Heres a thread with 70 replys thats less than 2 days old, viewtopic.php?f=1&t=208083

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:24 am

idk if people are trolling when they disclose their admiration for UCI or what, but it really surprises me that this is happening on TLS

User avatar
99.9luft
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby 99.9luft » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:38 am

the short-term future of UCI (class size at around 120-130) doesn't look too bad, of course given the sustainability of the employment/clerking data -- which according to reports by the current students, is promising to be such

however, the long-term future of UCI (class size of 150-180) is a whole diff ball game, IMO. Even if the economy improves drastically 5-7 years from now, i don't see UCI's then bigger classes coming close to rivaling USC/UCLA in the SoCal market as a whole (and esp in LA)

it will be interesting to observe how fast the classes will expand (the slower the better in the interest of jobs, clerkships, rankings).

Lastly, addressing a common concern mentioned above - from what I was told from both students and staff, it's no longer Chem calling in and procuring clerkships for the students. He can write a recommendation, of course, but it is still your grades that get you the job. I got the impression that current students don't seem to have a problem getting the clerkships by themselves (i guess this would be the 89 person class of 2Ls). Current UCI students should chime in, of course, since this was smth they told me and I didn't personally experience.

the most predictive data on jobs/clerkships will come after next year, when 119 of 2Ls (current 1Ls) will do OCI and apply for clerkships. After all, 119 is more similar to 120-130 than the still small 89 person class.

User avatar
Meepo
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: The Future of UCI

Postby Meepo » Tue Apr 16, 2013 2:49 am

Dr. Dre wrote:idk if people are trolling when they disclose their admiration for UCI or what, but it really surprises me that this is happening on TLS


can we ban this troll?




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 7 guests