UC Irvine Law acceptance rate released: LOWER THAN YALE'S Forum

[darkarmour]

I think UCI has been discussed to death... I'm guessing the most important selling points are:

1) free tuition
2) UC brand name
3) FUCKING INCREDIBLE PROFESSORS LINED UP, ALL HEAVY HITTERS IN ACADEMIA [source]

[Mr. Costello]

Kudos to them for getting an inaugural class with very good potential for success; however, it will be interesting to see what happens in the following years leading up to accreditation and their actual first ranking.

... and I'm glad to see my rejection there puts me in good and numerous company.

[Cavalier]

That's definitely impressive. I guess maybe I'll stop laughing at their top 20 ambitions, at least until the results from the next class come out.

[bigben]

68 seats? At almost a third the size of Yale (which I believe is the smallest law school in the country?) this school is well-positioned to game a system that is notoriously biased in favor of smaller schools. With so few seats, I guess it makes sense that they were able to nail down a group of people who were committed to attending so that they could ding everybody else. Did they have ED admissions?

[KiwiApple]

I think UCI has been discussed to death... I'm guessing the most important selling points are:

1) free tuition
2) UC brand name
3) FUCKING INCREDIBLE PROFESSORS LINED UP, ALL HEAVY HITTERS IN ACADEMIA [source]

No, that ranking is mostly because of Erwin. If he goes to XXX school, that XXX school will be up there in the rankings.

[enygma]

Now I am wondering how many of the 110 students are CA residents.

Beats me, but I'm guessing ~35-40 out of the 68 0L students are Californians.

I think that's likely.

68? Isn't that over-enrolling?

On to other news:

Admission Denied Due To Unpaid Student Loans

The New York Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department denied the application for bar admission of an applicant who had passed the February 2008 bar exam. The applicant disclosed student loans with a total balance of $430,000. He professed an intent to repay and "attributed his nonpayment to the downturn in the economy and bad faith negotiations on the part of some of the loan servicers." The court noted that the loans dated back to 1985, he had not made substantial payments and "had not been flexible" in dealing with the loan servicers. (Mike Frisch)


How can you possibly get 430k in LS loans?

maybe not paying them at all for 24 years?

[dresden doll]

68 seats? At almost a third the size of Yale (which I believe is the smallest law school in the country?) this school is well-positioned to game a system that is notoriously biased in favor of smaller schools. With so few seats, I guess it makes sense that they were able to nail down a group of people who were committed to attending so that they could ding everybody else. Did they have ED admissions?

Ah, the cynics rear up their heads. Just kidding. I actually do agree with you.

[fluffy]

But...will it hold up next year? They most likely aren't going to be offering a full ride to the next class, so that'll probably deter some people from applying.

The economy *could* pick up between now and next cycle, which would also stop some people from applying.

Most importantly, the school could suck, which will certainly stop many people from applying.

What I'm saying is: the numbers look great for this first class, but it doesn't mean jack to me. What will mean something is if they can maintain for 5+ years.

Exactly. Free tuition and the allure of being in the inaugural class are the draws here. After that, far fewer "qualified" people would want to pay sticker (or close to it) at a new school with no alumni. Furthermore, if they keep the ratio of females to males that high, you could count me out! (though my #s would make me auto reject anyway)

[Whatisthis]

{

This school doesn't even have a building yet, let alone the fact that it isn't even ABA- accredited. Why would these people who could have presumably gone to USC choose this school?

I really don’t get it.

Oh they have a building alright.

Does the law school have its own building? I thought they were holding classes in various buildings throughout the campus.

[darkarmour]

I think UCI has been discussed to death... I'm guessing the most important selling points are:

1) free tuition
2) UC brand name
3) FUCKING INCREDIBLE PROFESSORS LINED UP, ALL HEAVY HITTERS IN ACADEMIA [source]

No, that ranking is mostly because of Erwin. If he goes to XXX school, that XXX school will be up there in the rankings.

Maybe, but Leiter took that into account when projecting the UCI's faculty impact. SEE:

The new law faculty at the University of California at Irvine presents a special case. So far, they have only a bit more than a dozen faculty. Given Dean Chemerinsky’s very high citation count (he is now the most cited full-time law professor in the country, with Sunstein’s departure for government service), to simply add his cite count to the currently small number of faculty would produce highly misleading results. At the same time, as a new law school, some indication of its scholarly impact performance seems especially relevant, so I have adopted the following device: I have assumed that the next thirteen hires will have the same scholarly impact as those already hired (not including Chemerinsky), and thus have estimated Irvine’s per capita impact score on that basis (so basically Chemerinsky’s citations plus (the total citations of all other faculty times 2) divided by the (current faculty size x 2) plus Chemerinsky).

[KiwiApple]

{

This school doesn't even have a building yet, let alone the fact that it isn't even ABA- accredited. Why would these people who could have presumably gone to USC choose this school?

I really don’t get it.

Oh they have a building alright.

Does the law school have its own building? I thought they were holding classes in various buildings throughout the campus.

Yeah the Donald B. building.

[Formerbruin]

Now I am wondering how many of the 110 students are CA residents.

Beats me, but I'm guessing ~35-40 out of the 68 0L students are Californians.

I think that's likely.

68? Isn't that over-enrolling?

On to other news:

Admission Denied Due To Unpaid Student Loans

The New York Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department denied the application for bar admission of an applicant who had passed the February 2008 bar exam. The applicant disclosed student loans with a total balance of $430,000. He professed an intent to repay and "attributed his nonpayment to the downturn in the economy and bad faith negotiations on the part of some of the loan servicers." The court noted that the loans dated back to 1985, he had not made substantial payments and "had not been flexible" in dealing with the loan servicers. (Mike Frisch)


How can you possibly get 430k in LS loans?

Probably includes loans from a private undergrad, too.

[KiwiApple]

Admission Denied Due To Unpaid Student Loans

The New York Appellate Division for the Third Judicial Department denied the application for bar admission of an applicant who had passed the February 2008 bar exam. The applicant disclosed student loans with a total balance of $430,000. He professed an intent to repay and "attributed his nonpayment to the downturn in the economy and bad faith negotiations on the part of some of the loan servicers." The court noted that the loans dated back to 1985, he had not made substantial payments and "had not been flexible" in dealing with the loan servicers. (Mike Frisch)


How can you possibly get 430k in LS loans?

maybe not paying them at all for 24 years?

I am thinking maybe he was living large as a law student.

[Arrow]

Wow, I am very impressed. After reading Chemerinsky's book, I have to say he must also be an amazing Dean.

The low acceptance rate is definitely going to boost their rankings up so much (as everyone else has said).

They should take transfers too (and give their transfer class all full scholarships ). This way, the entire 2L year will only be transfers (there will be no stigma) and the classes will be super small. Also, I wonder if they rejected people with super high numbers to yield protect. They must have chosen their range very carefully.

They may get a high ranking to start (from these statistics), but can they keep it over the years (as people above have challenged). When they stop giving everyone full scholarships, the LSAT/GPA of the class will likely fall.

[calapp09]

--ImageRemoved--

--ImageRemoved--

--ImageRemoved--

[bigben]

68 seats? At almost a third the size of Yale (which I believe is the smallest law school in the country?) this school is well-positioned to game a system that is notoriously biased in favor of smaller schools. With so few seats, I guess it makes sense that they were able to nail down a group of people who were committed to attending so that they could ding everybody else. Did they have ED admissions?

Ah, the cynics rear up their heads. Just kidding. I actually do agree with you.

Cynical maybe, but not judgmental. More power to them.

[rightthat]

I'm impressed. And I'm sure they were smart about who they made offers to, but I also think that the downturn in the economy could not have come at a better time for their three-years-free-tuition offer (though some will undoubtedly make an argument with respect to choosing prestige and job-prospects over $$$ in the short-term/ debt minimization).

Keep in mind, however, that with an inaugural class of 68 students, which is less than 40% the size of Yale/Stanford/Chicago, less than 13% the size of Harvard, and less than about 20% the size of Michigan, Columbia, NYU, Virginia, Penn, or Berkeley. My percentages may be rough, get over it. In addition, I would guess that many of the students who applied to UCI did not apply to the other schools I've already mentioned, and many of their total pool probably didn't even apply to the T20-25 schools. Free tuition + Cali + major recession = large applicant pool. Heck, the free tuition alone probably would have been sufficient.

Ahh ... so some of my points have already been made, I see ...

[Brucewaynegretzky]

I think they will be able to maintain their stats level next year. They will likely take another VERY small class and when people can research the school and see what kind of stats they accept they will draw more applicants with those numbers. Isn't that the process most people here used to determine where they were applying? It won't be difficult for them to get 60 more students of the same caliber. It's not like they won't have ANY scholarships. They can still use schollies to draw superb applicants. Overall, I think this incoming class will create a really strong foundation for the school in the future.

[bigben]

Also, I wonder if they rejected people with super high numbers to yield protect. They must have chosen their range very carefully.

I think it's clear that they engaged in "yield protection," but not by choosing a range of numbers. They seem to have literally narrowed it down to a group of people who were committed or feigned commitment to attending the school, and just chose the highest numbers out of that crowd. Everyone else was dinged.

[Oblomov]

from http://www.law.uci.edu/press_releases/04-16-09.html


The law school's yield rate, or the percentage of admitted students who choose to attend, is 62%, with 68 students committing to come from 110 who were accepted. This is second only to Harvard Law School, which has a 68% percent yield rate, and Yale, with a 78% rate, according to ABA data.

Mattth Fail.

[KiwiApple]

Also, I wonder if they rejected people with super high numbers to yield protect. They must have chosen their range very carefully.

I think it's clear that they engaged in "yield protection," but not by choosing a range of numbers. They seem to have literally narrowed it down to a group of people who were committed or feigned commitment to attending the school, and just chose the highest numbers out of that crowd. Everyone else was dinged.

No. They accepted everyone with 164+ in the beginning of the cycle. Then later they started looking at GPAs too because they got even more applications.

[Cavalier]

from http://www.law.uci.edu/press_releases/04-16-09.html


The law school's yield rate, or the percentage of admitted students who choose to attend, is 62%, with 68 students committing to come from 110 who were accepted. This is second only to Harvard Law School, which has a 68% percent yield rate, and Yale, with a 78% rate, according to ABA data.

Mattth Fail.

Wow, lol. Says a lot about the quality of UC Irvine. (sarcasm, before someone posts an angry response)

[Oblomov]

from http://www.law.uci.edu/press_releases/04-16-09.html


The law school's yield rate, or the percentage of admitted students who choose to attend, is 62%, with 68 students committing to come from 110 who were accepted. This is second only to Harvard Law School, which has a 68% percent yield rate, and Yale, with a 78% rate, according to ABA data.

Mattth Fail.

Wow, lol. Says a lot about the quality of UC Irvine. (sarcasm, before someone posts an angry response)

Maybe they just don't consider Yale a law school. Wouldn't be a groundless assertion.

[KiwiApple]

from http://www.law.uci.edu/press_releases/04-16-09.html


The law school's yield rate, or the percentage of admitted students who choose to attend, is 62%, with 68 students committing to come from 110 who were accepted. This is second only to Harvard Law School, which has a 68% percent yield rate, and Yale, with a 78% rate, according to ABA data.

Mattth Fail.

Wow, lol. Says a lot about the quality of UC Irvine. (sarcasm, before someone posts an angry response)

Hey. You need to twist your statistics SOMEHOW.

[dresden doll]

Wow, I am very impressed. After reading Chemerinsky's book, I have to say he must also be an amazing Dean.

The low acceptance rate is definitely going to boost their rankings up so much (as everyone else has said).

They should take transfers too (and give their transfer class all full scholarships ). This way, the entire 2L year will only be transfers (there will be no stigma) and the classes will be super small. Also, I wonder if they rejected people with super high numbers to yield protect. They must have chosen their range very carefully.

They may get a high ranking to start (from these statistics), but can they keep it over the years (as people above have challenged). When they stop giving everyone full scholarships, the LSAT/GPA of the class will likely fall.

I'm not fully sure how this works out, but I think rankings take into account previous year's medians alone. And UCI won't be ranked for a couple of years until they get accredited. So I don't see how this year's medians will boost their rankings at all, unless they manage to give them enough of a head start that they're able to maintain what they've got until the accreditation/rankings kick in.