UC Irvine 2013

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
1800calturk
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:32 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby 1800calturk » Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:07 am

lt0826 wrote:
DarkwingDick wrote:I can't quite bring myself to submit.

Can students that submitted walk me through your reasoning?

Here's mine up to this point:

I know there are incredible opportunities at Irvine. First off the scholarship, second the incredible amount of individualized attention and care we’ll receive both in the classroom and in professional endeavors, third the chance to be part of creating a new law school ethos and fourth, but relatively inconsequential, a much more pleasant three years than law school will probably be anywhere else.

I guess what I perceive to be the biggest risk is mediocrity. I don’t want to go to a school with mediocre students and graduate with a degree from a mediocre institution. My friend and I were discussing this, and everytime I’m about to submit, I hear him saying, “Your law school will be on your resume FOREVER.” And he’s right. Regardless of how promising a start the school gets, or even our class is (but I have some doubts about that, too), it will be harder and harder each subsequent year to attract quality candidates, as the money, the press and the novelty fade. After graduation though, your school is often shorthand for your quality. There are exceptions, but I don’t know if I’m willing to take that risk in this market. Further, even a quick glance through this cycle's accepted dots at UCI on LSN shows that most of the upper third of admits will not be attending.

Concerning US News, this year's class will be the first to feel the effects. The school cannot be ranked until it has employment statistics, and those will come out right before we potentially graduate. There's been a lot of talk about how UCI's numbers are on par with top 20, but I'd honestly be surprised if those numbers even managed to stay at that level, much less rise, considering that scholarships are only half this year, a drastic drop in applications despite still being free to apply, and a larger projected class. Furthermore, the numbers that will have a much more significant impact on the rankings and job prospects are the assessment ranking from peers and from lawyers & judges. From my personal experience, speaking with recent graduates from T14 schools, these numbers will not be kind to Irvine.

Thoughts?


I actually agonized over whether to respond to your post because of the tone you took with it. I can't say I am certain I want to convince you to attend UCI. On the other hand, tone in writing can be misinterpreted. I am wondering if you attended ASD. If you attended ASD and still feel the way you do, then I think maybe you should follow your gut and maybe UCI isn't right for you. And if you've been accepted into a very prestigious school and if others knowing that is important to you then I think maybe UCI isn't the right place for you either. There is some risk. But when evaluating the risk I think the potential for it to payoff is greater than the chance it won't.

But anyway here are my thoughts:

The 1Ls I met and the 0Ls I met at ASD did not strike me as mediocre at all. I was very impressed by what they were doing, what they had accomplished, and by their energy and intelligence. The 1Ls were doing things I've only heard students from Yale getting to do as a 1L. There may be other schools where 1Ls get to be so involved in real case, but I am not aware of that aspect of those schools. For example, two students are helping an Iraqi man who will probably be killed if deported back to Iraq get asylum. They have done interviews, written memos and briefs and have in general done a lot of substantial work on the case. If the students were not competent, they would not have been able to do so much on this case. Personally, I am offended to be called mediocre as well. And I don't consider myself to be superior to those I've met either. So I certainly don't feel like I will be surrounded by mediocrity. I believe I will be surrounded by people I will be happy to have as colleagues and as resources to draw from in the future, as well as to have as friends. And it's more than just numbers. I didn't ask those I met about their LSAT or their GPA. I don't really care. As far as I can see they were smart and articulate and capable. And that's really what matters in the end.

Regarding your resume, after your first few years on the job, where you went to school matter a lot less unless you have you are pursuing academia, high level federal judiciary positions, or perhaps partnerships at the top firms in the country. What will matter is your performance on the job. Employers in OC seem very anxious to hire Irvine grads, and some of these firms do have a national presence.

Lastly, regarding rankings - these things tend to feed on themselves. I saw the quality of students that were admitted last year, and when deciding where to apply, felt the caliber of students, as well as of the faculty, were definitely high enough for me. If this class is equally or more accomplished, then the applicant pool will continue to get stronger. If UCI has a high ranking off the top (even breaking top 50 for a new school is pretty amazing, forget top 20 or 25) then the buzz will be there and again, strong applicants will apply. If the employment numbers remain high, then also, strong candidates will continue to apply.

And of course, there are all the good things you mentioned.

Now is there risk - yes. But there is always risk. If you prefer the security of an established school, that is understandable. If you like having organizations and traditions in place, then maybe UCI isn't the right school for you. But if you like the energy of an entrepreneurial experience and see the opportunities they potentially create, and want to help create a successful law school, then please come to UCI and join us next year.

Good luck with your decision process.


This is a bit of a poor argument; it looks like you're saying that the school doesn't matter unless you're trying to get to the top of academia, government, or corporate career tracks (so, everything but pi). Anyway, I feel that Darkwing isn't making an unfair argument (although "mediocre" is pretty tactless). He's bringing up a legit concern - UC Irvine in 10 years won't be the UC Irvine that 1Ls right now signed up for. In fact, 0Ls aren't signing up for what 1Ls signed up for. UCI's stated future is a mid range UC with no significant scholarships, no novelty, and 300 students per class. This doesn't exactly spell T20...

The blindly-exuberant, defensive "if you question it, you just don't get it" attitude exhibited by many Irvine advocates rubbed me the wrong way. People are, and should be, on the fence for any major decision they make because it means they looked at both sides of the argument. UCI advocates loudly tout attributes of the school that aren't unique to UCI, like how involved students are with advocacy clinics. Awesome things are happening at LOTS of schools. Just recently in the news USC students launched campaign to parole a woman unfairly convicted who had served over 25 years in prison, and succeeded, doing all the work themselves. Everyone talks about how they are willing to bear the risk like it makes them cool, but to what benefit are you accepting the risk? There isn't really any risk: Hofstra is accredited, UCI WILL be accredited. Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates) so they're not risking anything there either, they hopefully just don't care that it's not a T20.

What UCI offers is that right now, it is a financially advantageous situation with small class sizes and great teachers (although not necessarily better than higher ranked schools). The students must possess some sense of initiative since they accepted, and show a commitment towards public service, which you might fit in with. You might like the area better than any other. Other than that - the talk of risk taking, instant T20 ranking, collegial spirit, career placement services, student involvement, or even student influence on curriculum - is irrelevant, or otherwise not unique to Irvine.

User avatar
pany1985
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:08 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby pany1985 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:07 am

1800calturk wrote:UCI's stated future is a mid range UC with no significant scholarships, no novelty, and 300 students per class. This doesn't exactly spell T20...

The blindly-exuberant, defensive "if you question it, you just don't get it" attitude exhibited by many Irvine advocates rubbed me the wrong way. People are, and should be, on the fence for any major decision they make because it means they looked at both sides of the argument. UCI advocates loudly tout attributes of the school that aren't unique to UCI, like how involved students are with advocacy clinics. Awesome things are happening at LOTS of schools. Just recently in the news USC students launched campaign to parole a woman unfairly convicted who had served over 25 years in prison, and succeeded, doing all the work themselves. Everyone talks about how they are willing to bear the risk like it makes them cool, but to what benefit are you accepting the risk? There isn't really any risk: Hofstra is accredited, UCI WILL be accredited. Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates) so they're not risking anything there either, they hopefully just don't care that it's not a T20.

What UCI offers is that right now, it is a financially advantageous situation with small class sizes and great teachers (although not necessarily better than higher ranked schools). The students must possess some sense of initiative since they accepted, and show a commitment towards public service, which you might fit in with. You might like the area better than any other. Other than that - the talk of risk taking, instant T20 ranking, collegial spirit, career placement services, student involvement, or even student influence on curriculum - is irrelevant, or otherwise not unique to Irvine.


You're absolutely correct if by "no significant scholarships" you mean "pretty much the same level of scholarships as any other top law school"... and by "no novelty" you mean "awesome professors and teaching students to be great lawyers as the top priority"... and by "300 students per class" you mean "200 students per class, similar to most established law schools." It may indeed wind up being mid-range among the UC's, but it would have to be ranked above #15 to do any better. There's no shame in coming in behind UC Berkeley and UCLA in USNWR.

Now I'll absolutely grant you that nobody should just be defensive and dismiss anyone with anything remotely bad to say about UCI. No school is perfect. I think and hope the good things here (collegial/cooperative atmosphere, etc.) are not unique to UCI. If those good things were unique to Irvine, every other law school in America would be a horrible place... and I'm fairly convinced that not all of them are. That said, just because they aren't unique qualities doesn't mean they aren't positive and attractive qualities that should be celebrated.

I definitely appreciate your recognition that going to UCI really isn't a risk, though. :wink:

User avatar
msch0i
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:55 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby msch0i » Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:47 am

1800calturk wrote:
This is a bit of a poor argument; it looks like you're saying that the school doesn't matter unless you're trying to get to the top of academia, government, or corporate career tracks (so, everything but pi). Anyway, I feel that Darkwing isn't making an unfair argument (although "mediocre" is pretty tactless). He's bringing up a legit concern - UC Irvine in 10 years won't be the UC Irvine that 1Ls right now signed up for. In fact, 0Ls aren't signing up for what 1Ls signed up for. UCI's stated future is a mid range UC with no significant scholarships, no novelty, and 300 students per class. This doesn't exactly spell T20...

The blindly-exuberant, defensive "if you question it, you just don't get it" attitude exhibited by many Irvine advocates rubbed me the wrong way. People are, and should be, on the fence for any major decision they make because it means they looked at both sides of the argument. UCI advocates loudly tout attributes of the school that aren't unique to UCI, like how involved students are with advocacy clinics. Awesome things are happening at LOTS of schools. Just recently in the news USC students launched campaign to parole a woman unfairly convicted who had served over 25 years in prison, and succeeded, doing all the work themselves. Everyone talks about how they are willing to bear the risk like it makes them cool, but to what benefit are you accepting the risk? There isn't really any risk: Hofstra is accredited, UCI WILL be accredited. Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates) so they're not risking anything there either, they hopefully just don't care that it's not a T20.

What UCI offers is that right now, it is a financially advantageous situation with small class sizes and great teachers (although not necessarily better than higher ranked schools). The students must possess some sense of initiative since they accepted, and show a commitment towards public service, which you might fit in with. You might like the area better than any other. Other than that - the talk of risk taking, instant T20 ranking, collegial spirit, career placement services, student involvement, or even student influence on curriculum - is irrelevant, or otherwise not unique to Irvine.


I like the fact that, several weeks ago, Irvine was a serious enough choice for you to start a thread asking people's opinions of it vs. USC (where, if I may point out, the snide remarks originated not from the Irvine advocates, but rather those of USC...) It's great that you were admitted to Columbia, but that doesn't mean it's appropriate for you come back here and make insulting generalizations about the admits -- see bolded (which are unfounded...especially because you assess for them the fact that "they're not risking anything") and the school (which pany has pointed out). Don't get me the wrong way - you are, of course, entitled to your opinion of Irvine, which appears to have changed dramatically since your Columbia acceptance. However, your way of expressing it is just a bit...well, distasteful.

User avatar
HungryHippo
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:55 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby HungryHippo » Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:29 am

1800calturk wrote:
lt0826 wrote:
DarkwingDick wrote:I can't quite bring myself to submit.

Can students that submitted walk me through your reasoning?
.......


Thoughts?


I actually agonized over whether to respond to
.....


Good luck with your decision process.


This is a bit of a poor argument; it looks like you're saying that the school doesn't matter unless you're trying to get to the top of academia, government, or corporate career tracks (so, everything but pi). Anyway, I feel that Darkwing isn't making an unfair argument (although "mediocre" is pretty tactless). He's bringing up a legit concern - UC Irvine in 10 years won't be the UC Irvine that 1Ls right now signed up for. In fact, 0Ls aren't signing up for what 1Ls signed up for. UCI's stated future is a mid range UC with no significant scholarships, no novelty, and 300 students per class. This doesn't exactly spell T20...

The blindly-exuberant, defensive "if you question it, you just don't get it" attitude exhibited by many Irvine advocates rubbed me the wrong way. People are, and should be, on the fence for any major decision they make because it means they looked at both sides of the argument. UCI advocates loudly tout attributes of the school that aren't unique to UCI, like how involved students are with advocacy clinics. Awesome things are happening at LOTS of schools. Just recently in the news USC students launched campaign to parole a woman unfairly convicted who had served over 25 years in prison, and succeeded, doing all the work themselves. Everyone talks about how they are willing to bear the risk like it makes them cool, but to what benefit are you accepting the risk? There isn't really any risk: Hofstra is accredited, UCI WILL be accredited. Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates) so they're not risking anything there either, they hopefully just don't care that it's not a T20.

What UCI offers is that right now, it is a financially advantageous situation with small class sizes and great teachers (although not necessarily better than higher ranked schools). The students must possess some sense of initiative since they accepted, and show a commitment towards public service, which you might fit in with. You might like the area better than any other. Other than that - the talk of risk taking, instant T20 ranking, collegial spirit, career placement services, student involvement, or even student influence on curriculum - is irrelevant, or otherwise not unique to Irvine.


I agree that with you that "UC Irvine in 10 years won't be the UC Irvine that 1Ls right now signed up for." Whether or not Irvine is a t-20 ten years down the line, however, is just speculation. I also agree with you that some of the Irvine advocates rubbed people the wrong way with their "if you don't get it, you don't belong here" attitude. I agree also that awesome things are happening at many law schools. However, I think you are missing the point when it comes to Irvine, especially when you compare it with another school (Hofstra), in terms of risk. I don't think anybody is worried about accreditation. The "risk" and "awesome" things happening at UCI IS unique to Irvine and I don't see how you don't see that.

What interested me most about UCI was Dean Chemerinsky. This guy turned down safebet offers to head UNC AND Duke law school. We all know the problems of law schools (Tenure, curriculem, actually teaching students to be lawyers), You talk about risk, Dean Chermerinsky took a big one. Will his law school succeed? Maybe but the OC does seem excited about. I remember another members ancedote with a vp of an OC firm, "You wan't to make money? Come to UCI!"

You say UCI right now is a financially advantageous situation and great teachers. but we all hear your patronzing tone. "Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates)" How the hell do you know? LSN? That was a dick move buddy.

I also liked the great teachers (although not necessarily better than higher ranked schools) snide comment. (And Why are you still talking about rank when UCI isn't ranked yet?) I don't know about you but I think it's amazing that Irvine faculty ranks 9th when it is a new law school. Can Hofsta say the same? So I don't understand this "not necessarily better than higher ranked schools" bs when ucla, usc, ucd are ranked behind them. But you know what, who cares? (By the way, congratulations on distancing yourself from NYU in the new rankings.... but did you know that NYU's faculty recieved a score of 65..... 4 points more than Columbia. Does that mean NYU professors are better?) What sets apart Irvine is the fact that such high caliber professfors would take the risk to come to Irvine.

I don't post much, (more of a lurker), but I agree with ms.ch0i that you changed dramatically since your Columbia acceptance. Now take your ass to NYC and stop preaching over here son.

User avatar
1800calturk
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 5:32 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby 1800calturk » Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:50 am

I'm legitimately sorry if I came off snide or rude. I understated UCI's benefits in response to the backlash most, if not all, critics receive on these forums, plus I think there's been ample argument for the positives. And before we get too heated, let's remember that this is a public forum for discussion of law schools, and not an "advocate my law school" forum. I was jumping back in here if anyone in the future faces similar decisions that I had been (wanting to be in SoCal), and I think it's fair to present an opposing side, and also my personal opinion of a school I had a really hard time saying no to.

What I'm trying to say is that, for the students, I don't think this is that risky or revolutionary of a project: the curriculum is the same as any law school, the future curriculum is probably going to be about the same as any law school (we're trying to be lawyers after all), and every noteworthy law school is doing really cool things. Will UCI succeed? Absolutely. I don't at all believe there is a risk of "failure", I think UCI will easily be a T50 if not a T30 school very soon, and like any T50 school if you're happy with the school and its area then you'll do pretty well going there.

When I say that most students got into better ranked law schools, that's not at all patronizing. Most students go to Columbia because they didn't get into better ranked law schools. Most students go to Stanford because they didn't get into better schools. That's a fact of life. There are outliers who disregarded higher ranked schools for schools more ideal to their situation, be it atmosphere, location, $, or specific programs. But to imply that this is the norm at UCI is just irresponsible. 1Ls did that because their opportunity was very different than any class after them. UCI may have be a better situation for some people, but the pitch I was given for UCI was that other schools are at each others throats, the faculty doesn't care about you, and UCI is doing unprecedented things. What I found, and I visited a LOT of law schools, is that it's a burgeoning law school, but otherwise pretty standard. Chemerinsky was a big draw for me, but Schizer is just as awesome, and if we're bringing up my old USC UCI thread, Rasmussen has a slight edge in personality on both of them (sorry Dean Schizer). The students were nice/happy and I like a lot of 0Ls on here or in person, but students are nice/happy at most schools, with very few exceptions. The "you won't get people tearing pages out of notebooks" sell is more standard than not. The teachers were incredible at all schools I went to. My feeling is that UCI, although a burgeoning school, is basically not more unique than any other school was beyond the fact that it's new, but we were all young once. People who argue otherwise probably didn't visit very many schools.

Last thing I'm gonna say on this website is this. I would've been very happy to go to UCI. However, I've found that I'd be just as happy going many other places, which doesn't make me some rankings whore or someone who "just doesn't get it". If you chose/are looking at UCI, you're going to do fine, but a lot of us at "higher ranked" schools aren't somehow trading happiness for ranking.

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

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby ViP » Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:02 pm

1800calturk wrote:I'm legitimately sorry if I came off snide or rude. I understated UCI's benefits in response to the backlash most, if not all, critics receive on these forums, plus I think there's been ample argument for the positives. And before we get too heated, let's remember that this is a public forum for discussion of law schools, and not an "advocate my law school" forum. I was jumping back in here if anyone in the future faces similar decisions that I had been (wanting to be in SoCal), and I think it's fair to present an opposing side, and also my personal opinion of a school I had a really hard time saying no to.

What I'm trying to say is that, for the students, I don't think this is that risky or revolutionary of a project: the curriculum is the same as any law school, the future curriculum is probably going to be about the same as any law school (we're trying to be lawyers after all), and every noteworthy law school is doing really cool things. Will UCI succeed? Absolutely. I don't at all believe there is a risk of "failure", I think UCI will easily be a T50 if not a T30 school very soon, and like any T50 school if you're happy with the school and its area then you'll do pretty well going there.

When I say that most students got into better ranked law schools, that's not at all patronizing. Most students go to Columbia because they didn't get into better ranked law schools. Most students go to Stanford because they didn't get into better schools. That's a fact of life. There are outliers who disregarded higher ranked schools for schools more ideal to their situation, be it atmosphere, location, $, or specific programs. But to imply that this is the norm at UCI is just irresponsible. 1Ls did that because their opportunity was very different than any class after them. UCI may have be a better situation for some people, but the pitch I was given for UCI was that other schools are at each others throats, the faculty doesn't care about you, and UCI is doing unprecedented things. What I found, and I visited a LOT of law schools, is that it's a burgeoning law school, but otherwise pretty standard. Chemerinsky was a big draw for me, but Schizer is just as awesome, and if we're bringing up my old USC UCI thread, Rasmussen has a slight edge in personality on both of them (sorry Dean Schizer). The students were nice/happy and I like a lot of 0Ls on here or in person, but students are nice/happy at most schools, with very few exceptions. The "you won't get people tearing pages out of notebooks" sell is more standard than not. The teachers were incredible at all schools I went to. My feeling is that UCI, although a burgeoning school, is basically not more unique than any other school was beyond the fact that it's new, but we were all young once. People who argue otherwise probably didn't visit very many schools.

Last thing I'm gonna say on this website is this. I would've been very happy to go to UCI. However, I've found that I'd be just as happy going many other places, which doesn't make me some rankings whore or someone who "just doesn't get it". If you chose/are looking at UCI, you're going to do fine, but a lot of us at "higher ranked" schools aren't somehow trading happiness for ranking.


This is absolutely true. I'm glad you cleaned up your previous post, which was honestly pretty distasteful.

I should say, though, that the majority of UCI advocates on TLS have not been saying "if you don't want to attend UCI you just don't get it." This is a misconception and exaggeration that a few TLSers have mentioned (not just yourself).

Many advocates have said that UCI is a very different type of school and that some applicants might not like it as a #1 choice (very true, in my opinion). These are by far the majority of pro-UCI comments, and I don't think they're condescending in the slightest. There have been a couple of obnoxious posts, but I always seem to find other posters responding with respect and clarity.

I'm not sure why you think UCI 0Ls weren't accepted to much better schools, though... In all honesty, I met quite a few students at ASD that were accepted to T14s, and many, many students waitlisted at T14s and accepted to T20s with great money. The very first girl I spoke with told me that she'd been accepted to Columbia and was either pending/accepted at Yale and Stanford. Now, she may have been lying, but I doubt it...

Anyways, I didn't know about Columbia. That's amazing! Congrats! Best of luck!

socal99
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby socal99 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:06 pm

You people all have far too much time on your hands. Go to a law school because you want to, and once in focus on getting good grades and becoming a competent attorney rather than obsessing over rankings. Regardless of where you go to school it's up to you to make a successful career for yourself. Unless of course you want to be on the Supreme Court, in which case you'd better go to Harvard or Yale.

socal99
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:26 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby socal99 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:36 pm

socal99 wrote:You people all have far too much time on your hands. Go to a law school because you want to, and once in focus on getting good grades and becoming a competent attorney rather than obsessing over rankings. Regardless of where you go to school it's up to you to make a successful career for yourself. Unless of course you want to be on the Supreme Court, in which case you'd better go to Harvard or Yale.


Also if you are the type that aspires to be on the Supreme Court, do the country a favor and go to a 10th tier unaccredited law school.

User avatar
lt0826
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:58 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby lt0826 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:32 pm

1800calturk wrote:This is a bit of a poor argument; it looks like you're saying that the school doesn't matter unless you're trying to get to the top of academia, government, or corporate career tracks (so, everything but pi).


That's taking what I said wrong. There's a difference between being partner at a Vault top 100 firm let's say and a firm somewhere below that or even a mid-sized firm. So if you are happy in corporate but don't care if you are at a top firm in NYC then school rank is less important. If the prestige of your firm matters, well I suspect the top firms value top schools on your degree. I am unusual it seems in that I have no desire to work in NYC, so for me I don't need that level of portability. And there are a number of firms in the OC that have a presence in other large cities as well.

There are PLENTY of government opportunities that don't lead to being a judge on the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. And not everyone wants a high profile position for a number of different reasons. And I am not even sure I would rule these options out completely, but it is true that your chances go way up if you go to a T10, or for Supreme Court - YHS.

Academia, well even Dean C admits that H/Y/S are a league of their own hear. And of course other schools in the T10 have an edge as well. However, academia is changing to where getting published matters a lot more than it used to. I do have some interest in academia. I admit that if H/Y/S accepted me I would be going there, and I am still waiting on a Harvard decision. But I have decided to attend UCI over Georgetown and Tx in large part because of the size of the schools and the personal attention I think I can get at UCI. I think I have a much better chance at getting published and of being mentored at UCI. And I'd be lying to say the scholarship money didn't also play a role in my decision.

But anyway - point being that there are plenty of options in government and corporate law for UCI students IMO. Academia is riskier - but in general outside of Y/H/S it's very difficult to break into academia - Chicago and Columbia also do well here. And the rest of the T15 does OK as well but it becomes much more difficult and advanced degrees and publications start to matter a lot more than anything else after the top 5 or 6 schools or so.

1800calturk wrote:Most UCI students this year didn't get into much higher ranking schools (based on estimates) so they're not risking anything there either, they hopefully just don't care that it's not a T20.


Actually looking at LSN a number of those who are accepted and haven't withdrawn from UCI yet have T20 acceptances, some with $$. And there are even quite a few with either T10 acceptances or T10 WLs. I suspect that many with $$ into a T20 might pick the T20 and that would certainly seem like a reasonable decision. Though some who prefer SoCal might still pick UCI. You are right that a lot of people will choose among the highest ranked schools they got into - and that is certainly rational. But rankings aren't be all - end alls.

Anyway - you definitely deserve congratulations for getting into Columbia - that is no small feat!! It also looks likes you were accepted into Berkeley - so congrats on that as well. Best of luck to you at Columbia.

SandyC877
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:27 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby SandyC877 » Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:08 pm

[strike]
1800calturk wrote:I'm legitimately sorry if I came off snide or rude. I understated UCI's benefits in response to the backlash most, if not all, critics receive on these forums, plus I think there's been ample argument for the positives. And before we get too heated, let's remember that this is a public forum for discussion of law schools, and not an "advocate my law school" forum. I was jumping back in here if anyone in the future faces similar decisions that I had been (wanting to be in SoCal), and I think it's fair to present an opposing side, and also my personal opinion of a school I had a really hard time saying no to.

What I'm trying to say is that, for the students, I don't think this is that risky or revolutionary of a project: the curriculum is the same as any law school, the future curriculum is probably going to be about the same as any law school (we're trying to be lawyers after all), and every noteworthy law school is doing really cool things. Will UCI succeed? Absolutely. I don't at all believe there is a risk of "failure", I think UCI will easily be a T50 if not a T30 school very soon, and like any T50 school if you're happy with the school and its area then you'll do pretty well going there.

When I say that most students got into better ranked law schools, that's not at all patronizing. Most students go to Columbia because they didn't get into better ranked law schools. Most students go to Stanford because they didn't get into better schools. That's a fact of life. There are outliers who disregarded higher ranked schools for schools more ideal to their situation, be it atmosphere, location, $, or specific programs. But to imply that this is the norm at UCI is just irresponsible. 1Ls did that because their opportunity was very different than any class after them. UCI may have be a better situation for some people, but the pitch I was given for UCI was that other schools are at each others throats, the faculty doesn't care about you, and UCI is doing unprecedented things. What I found, and I visited a LOT of law schools, is that it's a burgeoning law school, but otherwise pretty standard. Chemerinsky was a big draw for me, but Schizer is just as awesome, and if we're bringing up my old USC UCI thread, Rasmussen has a slight edge in personality on both of them (sorry Dean Schizer). The students were nice/happy and I like a lot of 0Ls on here or in person, but students are nice/happy at most schools, with very few exceptions. The "you won't get people tearing pages out of notebooks" sell is more standard than not. The teachers were incredible at all schools I went to. My feeling is that UCI, although a burgeoning school, is basically not more unique than any other school was beyond the fact that it's new, but we were all young once. People who argue otherwise probably didn't visit very many schools.

Last thing I'm gonna say on this website is this. I would've been very happy to go to UCI. However, I've found that I'd be just as happy going many other places, which doesn't make me some rankings whore or someone who "just doesn't get it". If you chose/are looking at UCI, you're going to do fine, but a lot of us at "higher ranked" schools aren't somehow trading happiness for ranking.
[/strike]

better.

take your academic insecurities elsewhere. you don't have to prove anything to anyone in this thread.

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

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby ruleser » Sat Apr 17, 2010 8:12 pm

Just back from the campus - which brings up a real positive that doesn't get mentioned much - the housing situation. Saw the Verano and PV apartments - law students are guaranteed on-campus grad housing at below market - you do the 2 bed, they pair you up with a roomy, and you each pay about $550/mnth, about 3 minute walk to the law school. Also checked out apts across the street today - loved Berekely Ct., pool, hot tub, bunch of great apts, reasonable, literally right across the street from the law school and a shopping center. For me lots of law schools had the drawback of just leaving you in the middle of some city to fend for yourself. The housing sit. at UCI is a big plus for me... (plus the on-campus workout center open til 1AM)

User avatar
DarkwingDick
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:59 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby DarkwingDick » Mon Apr 19, 2010 12:34 am

Helpful thread re: how much your school matters after your first job--

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=115024

User avatar
msch0i
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:55 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby msch0i » Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:41 am

WL on LSN....is this one real?!

Neelg01
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:31 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby Neelg01 » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:09 am

Can you guys just make another thread about your online argument? Your crowding out the acceptances and rejection posts haha.

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

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby ViP » Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:19 am

Neelg01 wrote:Can you guys just make another thread about your online argument? Your crowding out the acceptances and rejection posts haha.


Trust me... Whenever there's any movement on the UCI front, this thread makes it quite evident.

Deposits were due on the 15th, so you can expect the waitlists/rejections to start rolling...

User avatar
S de Garmeaux
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:00 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby S de Garmeaux » Mon Apr 19, 2010 12:49 pm

waitlisted on Saturday via snail mail. stoked it wasn't a ding, more waiting to come. anyone else WLed? Dinged?

User avatar
msch0i
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:55 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby msch0i » Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:24 pm

S de Garmeaux wrote:waitlisted on Saturday via snail mail. stoked it wasn't a ding, more waiting to come. anyone else WLed? Dinged?


I'm guessing this waitlist wave wasn't that big - there are only two others outside of S de Garmeaux that indicated they received waitlists on LSN.

Reeeeeeeally curious as to whether that rejection on LSN is real or not..

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby finalaspects » Tue Apr 20, 2010 1:28 pm

msch0i wrote:
S de Garmeaux wrote:waitlisted on Saturday via snail mail. stoked it wasn't a ding, more waiting to come. anyone else WLed? Dinged?


I'm guessing this waitlist wave wasn't that big - there are only two others outside of S de Garmeaux that indicated they received waitlists on LSN.

Reeeeeeeally curious as to whether that rejection on LSN is real or not..


irvine does plan to notify people of rejections right? they won't just keep everyone hanging?

User avatar
msch0i
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:55 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby msch0i » Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:29 pm

finalaspects wrote:
msch0i wrote:
S de Garmeaux wrote:waitlisted on Saturday via snail mail. stoked it wasn't a ding, more waiting to come. anyone else WLed? Dinged?


I'm guessing this waitlist wave wasn't that big - there are only two others outside of S de Garmeaux that indicated they received waitlists on LSN.

Reeeeeeeally curious as to whether that rejection on LSN is real or not..


irvine does plan to notify people of rejections right? they won't just keep everyone hanging?


Hungryhippo was told end of April. 10 more days :(

User avatar
lt0826
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:58 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby lt0826 » Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:36 pm

msch0i wrote:
finalaspects wrote:
msch0i wrote:
S de Garmeaux wrote:waitlisted on Saturday via snail mail. stoked it wasn't a ding, more waiting to come. anyone else WLed? Dinged?


I'm guessing this waitlist wave wasn't that big - there are only two others outside of S de Garmeaux that indicated they received waitlists on LSN.

Reeeeeeeally curious as to whether that rejection on LSN is real or not..


irvine does plan to notify people of rejections right? they won't just keep everyone hanging?


Hungryhippo was told end of April. 10 more days :(


Of the LSN acceptances 28% have decided UCI isn't right for them. Hoping there is room for acceptances for msch0i, calgal, and other active posters on here who are excited about UCI :-D. Or at least a WL. . .

User avatar
msch0i
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:55 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby msch0i » Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:56 pm

Thanks for the support, lt! :D :D

User avatar
S de Garmeaux
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:00 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby S de Garmeaux » Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:00 pm

I deliberately avoided this thread so that my hopes didn't raise... but now with my WL

SandyC877
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:27 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby SandyC877 » Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:01 pm

lt0826 wrote:Of the LSN acceptances 28% have decided UCI isn't right for them. Hoping there is room for acceptances for msch0i, calgal, and other active posters on here who are excited about UCI :-D. Or at least a WL. . .


2x!! :lol:
I'm excited at the thought of attending classes with these fine folks. Oh UCI how I love thee!!!

User avatar
calgal17
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:08 am

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby calgal17 » Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:06 pm

[/quote]Of the LSN acceptances 28% have decided UCI isn't right for them. Hoping there is room for acceptances for msch0i, calgal, and other active posters on here who are excited about UCI :-D. Or at least a WL. . .[/quote]

Thanks for the shoutout! :D We shall see I suppose...

Inygma
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:11 pm

Re: UC Irvine 2013

Postby Inygma » Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:49 pm

Woah discussion of movement in this thread? Blasphemy!

I really hope I get rejected, an acceptance would complicate things.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], BodieBroadus, Gaaooo, Maaza, mdu, rationalhound, samsamthomas and 16 guests