UC Irvine >> Good risk?

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
User avatar
sudoku
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:52 pm

UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby sudoku » Thu Dec 31, 2009 9:54 pm

When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

User avatar
jay115
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:01 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby jay115 » Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:00 am

sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?


leiter is really impressed with irvine (mostly chemerinsky), and as reputation is the most important score in the USWNR rankings, i think it will be ranked quite highly. that being said, irvine has absolutely no alumni base and irvine grads will be competing against USC and UCLA grads for jobs in an over-saturated socal market. i think most irvine grads will end up working in the oc, if thats what youre interested in.

User avatar
MoS
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:59 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby MoS » Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:37 am

sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

Double negatives make my mind hurt. It takes a school a minimum of 3 years (no more than 5) for the ABA to fully accredit it. Right now UC-Irvine is provisionally accredited, which means students can sit for the bar. I imagine they won't have a problem with being fully accredited.

I disagree with the above poster on what UC-Irvine's reputation will be. I think it will take years for UC-Irvine to establish a reputation score that will place it where its numbers alone would. That is because its based on questioners not only sent to other law schools but also judges and law firms who will likely not see many graduates for years.

As far as the alumni base, or lack thereof, I think UC-Irvine will pull all the strings that has gotten them the donations to fund their generous scholarship program to place their graduates in the best positions possible. How long that will last will depend on how the first few classes preform. So for now I would say UC-Irvine would be a reasonable risk. But the degree may carry no prestige 10 years from now, though that is unlikely.

mhernton
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby mhernton » Fri Jan 01, 2010 8:51 am

MoS wrote:
sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

Double negatives make my mind hurt. It takes a school a minimum of 3 years (no more than 5) for the ABA to fully accredit it. Right now UC-Irvine is provisionally accredited, which means students can sit for the bar. I imagine they won't have a problem with being fully accredited.

I disagree with the above poster on what UC-Irvine's reputation will be. I think it will take years for UC-Irvine to establish a reputation score that will place it where its numbers alone would. That is because its based on questioners not only sent to other law schools but also judges and law firms who will likely not see many graduates for years.

As far as the alumni base, or lack thereof, I think UC-Irvine will pull all the strings that has gotten them the donations to fund their generous scholarship program to place their graduates in the best positions possible. How long that will last will depend on how the first few classes preform. So for now I would say UC-Irvine would be a reasonable risk. But the degree may carry no prestige 10 years from now, though that is unlikely.



I complete agree. I graduated from the Rady School of Management with my MBA. Rady?? What is Rady??? Exactly... Rady is the new MBA program at UCSD. The school has all the same makings as a Business School powerhouse as Irvine has as a Law School. A Dean who is well known in Business School Academia, essentially a blank check from the UC Regents to put the program together, and faculty that are world renown. Markowitz's dissertation on portfolio diversification is the foundation for the Capital Asset Pricing Theory and the Mutual Fund industry, he is a nobel laureate and was one of my professors at Rady. Still no one in Southern California has really heard of the school because we have only graduated 3 classes of students. Most employers will immediately take a Merage, or Anderson student (both UC business schools) before us even in San Diego. It will take a while for the Brand to catch on regardless of the average GMAT score being around 680. Having personally experienced how many doors were shut because of the bad economy and employers not willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity, I won't risk that again with Law School. So I'm wary of Irvine regardless of marketing.

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

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby General Tso » Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:16 pm

mhernton wrote:I complete agree. I graduated from the Rady School of Management with my MBA. Rady?? What is Rady??? Exactly... Rady is the new MBA program at UCSD. The school has all the same makings as a Business School powerhouse as Irvine has as a Law School. A Dean who is well known in Business School Academia, essentially a blank check from the UC Regents to put the program together, and faculty that are world renown. Markowitz's dissertation on portfolio diversification is the foundation for the Capital Asset Pricing Theory and the Mutual Fund industry, he is a nobel laureate and was one of my professors at Rady. Still no one in Southern California has really heard of the school because we have only graduated 3 classes of students. Most employers will immediately take a Merage, or Anderson student (both UC business schools) before us even in San Diego. It will take a while for the Brand to catch on regardless of the average GMAT score being around 680. Having personally experienced how many doors were shut because of the bad economy and employers not willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity, I won't risk that again with Law School. So I'm wary of Irvine regardless of marketing.


Nice post. In your experience, are most big companies as concerned with prestige as law firms?

Oban
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:09 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby Oban » Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:33 pm

mhernton wrote:
MoS wrote:
sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

Double negatives make my mind hurt. It takes a school a minimum of 3 years (no more than 5) for the ABA to fully accredit it. Right now UC-Irvine is provisionally accredited, which means students can sit for the bar. I imagine they won't have a problem with being fully accredited.

I disagree with the above poster on what UC-Irvine's reputation will be. I think it will take years for UC-Irvine to establish a reputation score that will place it where its numbers alone would. That is because its based on questioners not only sent to other law schools but also judges and law firms who will likely not see many graduates for years.

As far as the alumni base, or lack thereof, I think UC-Irvine will pull all the strings that has gotten them the donations to fund their generous scholarship program to place their graduates in the best positions possible. How long that will last will depend on how the first few classes preform. So for now I would say UC-Irvine would be a reasonable risk. But the degree may carry no prestige 10 years from now, though that is unlikely.



I complete agree. I graduated from the Rady School of Management with my MBA. Rady?? What is Rady??? Exactly... Rady is the new MBA program at UCSD. The school has all the same makings as a Business School powerhouse as Irvine has as a Law School. A Dean who is well known in Business School Academia, essentially a blank check from the UC Regents to put the program together, and faculty that are world renown. Markowitz's dissertation on portfolio diversification is the foundation for the Capital Asset Pricing Theory and the Mutual Fund industry, he is a nobel laureate and was one of my professors at Rady. Still no one in Southern California has really heard of the school because we have only graduated 3 classes of students. Most employers will immediately take a Merage, or Anderson student (both UC business schools) before us even in San Diego. It will take a while for the Brand to catch on regardless of the average GMAT score being around 680. Having personally experienced how many doors were shut because of the bad economy and employers not willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity, I won't risk that again with Law School. So I'm wary of Irvine regardless of marketing.


Wait so you are going to Law school because your MBA didn't pan out?

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

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby Blindmelon » Fri Jan 01, 2010 2:38 pm

I think UC Irvine will shape up to be a solid low tier 1 in the future. Other than that, I don't foresee it ever breaking the top 30. As for accreditation, I wouldn't worry about that. If schools like Nova Southeastern get accredited, a solid UC will have no problem.

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby ruleser » Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:04 pm

Blindmelon wrote:I think UC Irvine will shape up to be a solid low tier 1 in the future. Other than that, I don't foresee it ever breaking the top 30. As for accreditation, I wouldn't worry about that. If schools like Nova Southeastern get accredited, a solid UC will have no problem.

Agree with this for the foreseeable future - and with poster above who says mainly expect to work in OC for now. I think UC Irvine will steal some of the Hastings/Davis crowd, and so become a competitor with them, maybe one with a higher potential upside because NorCal has 4 T1's while SoCal currently only has 2, and the drop from UCLA/USC to a mid-tier1 is not as steep as the drop from Stanford/Berkeley. Right now, Irvine will possibly hurt Chapman the most, and should I think place very well for the first few classes in OC - maybe even have a bit of a better in for the short-term than would USC, likely better than Loyola will short-term. Long-term will depend on how these grads do. It will take some years - especially with this economy, for LA to really get an opinion and care too much - if the econ were better, it would have played out differently I think, UCI would have competed with Loyola in LA, maybe be given shots over Hastings...

If you take a long-term view of it, as you should with something like this, I think it's very exciting that it will be the biggest player and lone T1 in a money-having market - the OC. That should give some decent entry ops, and from there, you will get to set the tone and people will pay attention to how you do, and the school will really have an investment in making sure they continue to help your career throughout, and your role as an alumnus will be more prominent, etc. You also will have some freedom to help shape the program (ie will law and econ be the focus, what journals it will have.)

But on the downside of that, there is no journal yet - so obviously won't be a top-national one within a week. There are no clubs/orgs, etc. And the thing I would think about most is that transfer ops may be lesser - I am not sure if you can transfer to an ABA school before your school is at least provisionally accreditted, so unlike attending say USC, the bump to Berk or Yale might not be possible, not sure.

All in all, if I lived in the OC or wanted to work there after grad, or maybe even SD, I would be super excited to have this school and its scholarships. Other than that, it depends on your other options and at least short-term goals...

mhernton
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby mhernton » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:23 am

Oban wrote:
mhernton wrote:
MoS wrote:
sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

Double negatives make my mind hurt. It takes a school a minimum of 3 years (no more than 5) for the ABA to fully accredit it. Right now UC-Irvine is provisionally accredited, which means students can sit for the bar. I imagine they won't have a problem with being fully accredited.

I disagree with the above poster on what UC-Irvine's reputation will be. I think it will take years for UC-Irvine to establish a reputation score that will place it where its numbers alone would. That is because its based on questioners not only sent to other law schools but also judges and law firms who will likely not see many graduates for years.

As far as the alumni base, or lack thereof, I think UC-Irvine will pull all the strings that has gotten them the donations to fund their generous scholarship program to place their graduates in the best positions possible. How long that will last will depend on how the first few classes preform. So for now I would say UC-Irvine would be a reasonable risk. But the degree may carry no prestige 10 years from now, though that is unlikely.



I complete agree. I graduated from the Rady School of Management with my MBA. Rady?? What is Rady??? Exactly... Rady is the new MBA program at UCSD. The school has all the same makings as a Business School powerhouse as Irvine has as a Law School. A Dean who is well known in Business School Academia, essentially a blank check from the UC Regents to put the program together, and faculty that are world renown. Markowitz's dissertation on portfolio diversification is the foundation for the Capital Asset Pricing Theory and the Mutual Fund industry, he is a nobel laureate and was one of my professors at Rady. Still no one in Southern California has really heard of the school because we have only graduated 3 classes of students. Most employers will immediately take a Merage, or Anderson student (both UC business schools) before us even in San Diego. It will take a while for the Brand to catch on regardless of the average GMAT score being around 680. Having personally experienced how many doors were shut because of the bad economy and employers not willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity, I won't risk that again with Law School. So I'm wary of Irvine regardless of marketing.


Wait so you are going to Law school because your MBA didn't pan out?


No. I would just send you my application package to explain it, but its a long read. Rady is a program that focuses on high tech/biotech start-ups. A friend of mine started a company and the plan was to bring me aboard after graduation to groom me as CEO. Then I would take the company to exit, whether that was a buy-out or a public offering. So I went to Rady and worked on the project on the side. By the end of the first semester the company was in real trouble cause of IP issues. My friend and the people involved took action based on hand shakes instead of written contracts. The company died, and I was sitting there a little before the half way mark in a MBA program. Half a degree is no degree, and it is invaluable to learn how money works, especially in program as innovative as Rady's. I don't criticize Rady Business, or Irvine Law from an educational stand point. Its just difficult to find employment when no one knows the quality of the school's product and when the economy is bad everyone is risk averse. The job I got after business school was with a defense consulting firm. I have 15 years of military experience. They didn't really care about the MBA, and certainly didn't pay me for it. I'm going to Law School now because I finally admitted to myself that I should have made it a goal in my life, and it puts me in the best position to help others.

mhernton
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby mhernton » Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:37 am

swheat wrote:
mhernton wrote:I complete agree. I graduated from the Rady School of Management with my MBA. Rady?? What is Rady??? Exactly... Rady is the new MBA program at UCSD. The school has all the same makings as a Business School powerhouse as Irvine has as a Law School. A Dean who is well known in Business School Academia, essentially a blank check from the UC Regents to put the program together, and faculty that are world renown. Markowitz's dissertation on portfolio diversification is the foundation for the Capital Asset Pricing Theory and the Mutual Fund industry, he is a nobel laureate and was one of my professors at Rady. Still no one in Southern California has really heard of the school because we have only graduated 3 classes of students. Most employers will immediately take a Merage, or Anderson student (both UC business schools) before us even in San Diego. It will take a while for the Brand to catch on regardless of the average GMAT score being around 680. Having personally experienced how many doors were shut because of the bad economy and employers not willing to take a risk on an unknown quantity, I won't risk that again with Law School. So I'm wary of Irvine regardless of marketing.


Nice post. In your experience, are most big companies as concerned with prestige as law firms?



The question you ask is a little too general for me to answer honestly. You have to look more to industry, and then job within the industry. Investment Banking is big on school name, so they will heavily recruit from certain schools. Commodities trading will also heavily recruit from certain schools. These industries are heavily concentrated in certain areas. Wall Street loves Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, NYU types among other. Chicago Commodities companies love the NorthWestern, UChicago type, Venture Capital is concentrated in Silicon Valley so loves the Stanford/Berkeley types, but San Francisco will also head to UCLA and USC for recruiting. The Deal is, and this is straight from the horses mouth, a recruiter from Morgan Stanley Mergers and Acquisitions out of Menlo Park, CA, A company will look to hire 8 our 10 people from their feeder schools. The other 2 spots are filled with professionals switching into Banking or from other schools that have reputations, but you need to have a 4.0 GPA to be seriously considered. Outside of that the job hunt is about who you know, so networking and informational conversations at local events.

Just keep this in mind, Harvard guys like Harvard Guys, Yaleys like Yaleys. When you are sitting in an interview you already have a common bond with someone who is an alumni. Its human nature. You are also a fairly well known quantity. They know the level of academic rigor you've endured, and the type of person that goes to X university program. They know to about a 70% certainty who you are. You don't have that advantage coming out of an unknown program.

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby ruleser » Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:20 am

mhernton wrote:The question you ask is a little too general for me to answer honestly. You have to look more to industry, and then job within the industry. Investment Banking is big on school name, so they will heavily recruit from certain schools. Commodities trading will also heavily recruit from certain schools. These industries are heavily concentrated in certain areas. Wall Street loves Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, NYU types among other. Chicago Commodities companies love the NorthWestern, UChicago type, Venture Capital is concentrated in Silicon Valley so loves the Stanford/Berkeley types, but San Francisco will also head to UCLA and USC for recruiting. The Deal is, and this is straight from the horses mouth, a recruiter from Morgan Stanley Mergers and Acquisitions out of Menlo Park, CA, A company will look to hire 8 our 10 people from their feeder schools. The other 2 spots are filled with professionals switching into Banking or from other schools that have reputations, but you need to have a 4.0 GPA to be seriously considered. Outside of that the job hunt is about who you know, so networking and informational conversations at local events.

Just keep this in mind, Harvard guys like Harvard Guys, Yaleys like Yaleys. When you are sitting in an interview you already have a common bond with someone who is an alumni. Its human nature. You are also a fairly well known quantity. They know the level of academic rigor you've endured, and the type of person that goes to X university program. They know to about a 70% certainty who you are. You don't have that advantage coming out of an unknown program.

I think this response should be pasted to the top of TLS' home page. It is the answer to 90% of the questions on the board about, "Should I choose the higher rank or lower with $$$", or, "Should I take a T30 even though its out of state or this T2 near me," etc.

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

Re: UC Irvine >> Good risk?

Postby ViP » Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:15 am

MoS wrote:
sudoku wrote:When can one reasonably expect UC Irvine to become accredited? I cannot foresee this school NOT being accredited some time soon, as it seems to be a powerhouse. I am interested in Constitutional Law, and Chemerinsky makes this school difficult to pass over, but I am nervous that the lack of accreditation and alumni base will make this school less of an intelligent decision. Any thoughts?

Double negatives make my mind hurt. It takes a school a minimum of 3 years (no more than 5) for the ABA to fully accredit it. Right now UC-Irvine is provisionally accredited, which means students can sit for the bar. I imagine they won't have a problem with being fully accredited.

I disagree with the above poster on what UC-Irvine's reputation will be. I think it will take years for UC-Irvine to establish a reputation score that will place it where its numbers alone would. That is because its based on questioners not only sent to other law schools but also judges and law firms who will likely not see many graduates for years.

As far as the alumni base, or lack thereof, I think UC-Irvine will pull all the strings that has gotten them the donations to fund their generous scholarship program to place their graduates in the best positions possible. How long that will last will depend on how the first few classes preform. So for now I would say UC-Irvine would be a reasonable risk. But the degree may carry no prestige 10 years from now, though that is unlikely.


Sorry for digging this up a bit, but I should note that US News' "quality assessment" has a "don't know enough to answer" option, which surely pertains to UC Irvine. Such an answer has no impact on ranking, positive or negative.

No lawyers or judges are going to give low grades to Irvine, because there is no basis on which to grade. Same goes for law school deans and faculty (what's known as "peer assessment").

Law school deans and faculty will, however, have a lot of positive things to say about UC Irvine, simply because they're familiar with the pedigree of Chemerinsky and his faculty.

So I don't see reputation being an issue in terms of US News rankings. Furthermore, with the high entering class numbers, the ridiculous faculty, and a 3:1 student-to-faculty ratio, Irvine should fare quite well with US News.

It also seems unreasonably foolish of someone of Dean Chemerinksy's stature and reputation to make bold claims like "top-20" without some basis. Those in the legal world tend to take Chemerinsky's words seriously, and he wouldn't be doing himself any favors by making an unreasonable prediction of UC Irvine's ranking.




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest