Ultimate California Application Thread

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
wired
Posts: 472
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 2:29 pm

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby wired » Sun Jan 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Danteshek wrote:
wired wrote:My application budget was tight. Davis and Hasting were excluded because they couldn't waive the application fee and I didn't see myself attending unless there was very substantial money (which I didn't expect). I wanted to apply to USC, but I had to decide between applying there and Berkeley. I decided if I had to pay over $40k for school, I would want it to be at T14 as opposed to USC. I regret not applying. I am considering budgeting it in over the next two weeks.

Really, I am just hoping for at least 80% at UCI. If I can get that, then I think almost anywhere else would have a tough time competing. My wife's family is about an hour away, I want to work gov't in Southern California, and as I have said, their faculty is a huge draw for me.


No need to go to a top flight school then. Take a scholarship to a school in Socal.


Yeah, it's a tough situation. Ultimate goal is USAO so school will matter, but more important is getting a federal clerkship. I feel pretty confident that the faculty at UCI will be able to make some connections for students who want to get a clerkship. Going to Loyola or USD would make that much more difficult.

I have a really particular utility function that makes my school preferences erratic.

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

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby Danteshek » Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:02 am

wired wrote:
Danteshek wrote:
wired wrote:My application budget was tight. Davis and Hasting were excluded because they couldn't waive the application fee and I didn't see myself attending unless there was very substantial money (which I didn't expect). I wanted to apply to USC, but I had to decide between applying there and Berkeley. I decided if I had to pay over $40k for school, I would want it to be at T14 as opposed to USC. I regret not applying. I am considering budgeting it in over the next two weeks.

Really, I am just hoping for at least 80% at UCI. If I can get that, then I think almost anywhere else would have a tough time competing. My wife's family is about an hour away, I want to work gov't in Southern California, and as I have said, their faculty is a huge draw for me.


No need to go to a top flight school then. Take a scholarship to a school in Socal.


Yeah, it's a tough situation. Ultimate goal is USAO so school will matter, but more important is getting a federal clerkship. I feel pretty confident that the faculty at UCI will be able to make some connections for students who want to get a clerkship. Going to Loyola or USD would make that much more difficult.

I have a really particular utility function that makes my school preferences erratic.



Even if AUSA your goal it's probably not going to happen until at least 5-10 years after you pass the bar. At that stage your performance and reputation as a DDA or PD will matter a lot more than what school you went to. Federal clerkships are more for people who want litigation jobs in big firms. People who want govt just go straight to the county offices. You can do this from any school.

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

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby jay115 » Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:58 am

mctj wrote:
jay115 wrote:Everyone can be paranoid about increasing tuition prices, but no one looks at sticker prices when deciding which law schools to attend - it's price after scholarship/aid, which the tuition increases go towards. Basically, the UCs are raising tuition so that they can fund more scholarships to attract better students. This seems to contradict everyone's prediction that Boalt and UCLA are going to tank off the face of the USWNR.


Did they state that somewhere? In was, and maybe some others as well are, working under the assumption that they are simply trying to become more self-sufficient, and take better advantage of the thousands of people willing to pay higher tuition, given the budget shortfall at the state level.

Could you direct me to whatever source from which you gleaned that information?


Sure: --LinkRemoved--, http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... ood-thing/

boilercat wrote:Weather is a really important consideration for me, too. That's one of the reasons I'd probably take UCLA over anything else lower than Duke. I am sick of the Midwestern weather.


It's why I chose to ED to UCLA - when I visited, I had a great time on the beach and met some wayy laid back people at a great school. plus instate tuition.

User avatar
Havaianas
Posts: 287
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:48 pm

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby Havaianas » Mon Jan 11, 2010 1:47 am

Is anyone still thinking about applying to Irvine? I though I was done with apps but UCI has kind of peaked my interest...
Last edited by Havaianas on Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby General Tso » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:48 am

ejjones wrote:
swheat wrote:
Veritas wrote:SW what did you pass up at USD for Hastings, money wise?


80 something K. 81 or 84, I dont remember. Passed up a similar amount at Loyola.


Is the assumption that you'd be able to keep the scholarship over all three years factored into this figure? In other words, what were the conditions.


Yeah that was assuming I kept the scholly. The condition was top 30% at USD I think, top 33% at Loyola. How you doing EJ?

User avatar
Quine
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:49 am

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby Quine » Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:07 am

jay115 wrote:
mctj wrote:
jay115 wrote:Everyone can be paranoid about increasing tuition prices, but no one looks at sticker prices when deciding which law schools to attend - it's price after scholarship/aid, which the tuition increases go towards. Basically, the UCs are raising tuition so that they can fund more scholarships to attract better students. This seems to contradict everyone's prediction that Boalt and UCLA are going to tank off the face of the USWNR.


Did they state that somewhere? In was, and maybe some others as well are, working under the assumption that they are simply trying to become more self-sufficient, and take better advantage of the thousands of people willing to pay higher tuition, given the budget shortfall at the state level.

Could you direct me to whatever source from which you gleaned that information?


Sure: --LinkRemoved--, http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... ood-thing/

boilercat wrote:Weather is a really important consideration for me, too. That's one of the reasons I'd probably take UCLA over anything else lower than Duke. I am sick of the Midwestern weather.


It's why I chose to ED to UCLA - when I visited, I had a great time on the beach and met some wayy laid back people at a great school. plus instate tuition.


You said: "fund more scholarships to attract better students."

Articles read: give more money to lower income students, off-setting tuition hikes for the neediest students by giving them the extra money they are taking from the richest students.

I went through the articles quickly, but I saw nothing about trying to attract better students. Presumably, they aren't giving out scholarships to every poor dumbass with a high school diploma. Nevertheless, I'm not seeing anything about merit aid. It looks like they're trying to raise tuition to cover their ass, and simply allocating some of the extra funds to make sure the poor kids aren't excluded by the new price.

If I missed the point where they talked about merit aid (definitely possible), please quote it for me.

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

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby jay115 » Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:46 pm

mctj wrote:
jay115 wrote:
mctj wrote:
jay115 wrote:Everyone can be paranoid about increasing tuition prices, but no one looks at sticker prices when deciding which law schools to attend - it's price after scholarship/aid, which the tuition increases go towards. Basically, the UCs are raising tuition so that they can fund more scholarships to attract better students. This seems to contradict everyone's prediction that Boalt and UCLA are going to tank off the face of the USWNR.


Did they state that somewhere? In was, and maybe some others as well are, working under the assumption that they are simply trying to become more self-sufficient, and take better advantage of the thousands of people willing to pay higher tuition, given the budget shortfall at the state level.

Could you direct me to whatever source from which you gleaned that information?


Sure: --LinkRemoved--, http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... ood-thing/

boilercat wrote:Weather is a really important consideration for me, too. That's one of the reasons I'd probably take UCLA over anything else lower than Duke. I am sick of the Midwestern weather.


It's why I chose to ED to UCLA - when I visited, I had a great time on the beach and met some wayy laid back people at a great school. plus instate tuition.


You said: "fund more scholarships to attract better students."

Articles read: give more money to lower income students, off-setting tuition hikes for the neediest students by giving them the extra money they are taking from the richest students.

I went through the articles quickly, but I saw nothing about trying to attract better students. Presumably, they aren't giving out scholarships to every poor dumbass with a high school diploma. Nevertheless, I'm not seeing anything about merit aid. It looks like they're trying to raise tuition to cover their ass, and simply allocating some of the extra funds to make sure the poor kids aren't excluded by the new price.

If I missed the point where they talked about merit aid (definitely possible), please quote it for me.


Most merit-based aid is distributed as need-based aid. Outgoing Dean Schill acknowledges that aid (merit or need) is a zero-sum game in that a limited amount of resources is distributed to a set amount of individuals: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/07/11/let ... l-tuition/. Thus, if you take the previous regents' statement that most of the tuition hikes will go to off-setting tuition and Dean Schill stating that that the need-based funds will go to attracting stronger students, I think the inference is rather apparent.

However, an inference is, of course, only an inference. If you received a fee-waiver to UCLA or Berkeley as a competitive student and get accepted, then you could probably figure out in the course of your cycle whether the UC system has become more competitive in its merit-based aid. If MCTJ and other skeptics are right and the UC system has just run out of money and heading over a cliff, then attend a better school or a different school that offers more money. If I and others who believe that the UC system is merely shifting more towards a private-like structure of endowment and finance are right, then you'll receive a competitive scholly comparable to that of UCLA's peers. Everyone wins.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4852
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby Borhas » Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:18 pm

dinged from Berkeley via email

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby Veritas » Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:19 pm

Berkeley is confusing me, still waiting for the ding.

Meanwhile, other CA news: In at Hastings earlier this week

wired
Posts: 472
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 2:29 pm

Re: Ultimate California Application Thread

Postby wired » Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:22 pm

Veritas wrote:Berkeley is confusing me, still waiting for the ding.

Meanwhile, other CA news: In at Hastings earlier this week


+1 on the Berkeley. It's like the time on Malcolm in the Middle where the girl just wanted Reese to go to prom with her and then dump him. It's EXACTLY like that.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], hellohalo, JazzyMac, Keilz, ThorB, Torres1893, wajdicm, Yahoo [Bot] and 24 guests