Top Law Schools

In addition to a full scholarship, I just got a letter from Chapman about an all expenses paid trip to campus that includes a cruise on a yacht. I mean, that's pretty serious. What do people think about the status of this school? It is in a nice area. I know its reputation in the film community is pretty good. Does something like this indicate it really is a rising star? One has to imagine a thing like this would attract a few high-number applicants and help it climb the rankings.

Any speculation where Chapman will be 10 years from now? Is top 50 ever possible for it?

I also received the invite! I am really interested in Chapman but am concerned about employment prospects. Although, they do seem to really want to do a lot for their students.

Ya, I also received the full tuition and the invite, not to mention hand written letter from the director of admissions. I feel like they're really doing a lot to take care of their students, but the fact that it's not top 100 makes it really hard to consider.

I went to Scholar's Weekend last year. It was awesome fun! They wine and dine you like crazy.

twintipping_bumps wrote:Any speculation where Chapman will be 10 years from now? Is top 50 ever possible for it?

Ever possible? Sure. In 10 years? Not a chance. They have to make some big changes just to get into the top 100.

Hmmph, they treated me like crap, maybe because I was a local kid. Either way, I still got a crappy scholly from them, while got way better offers from t2's.

They did send me the "R U Still There???" letter after the deadline for the deposit did go through, so there is that.

I'll be at scholar's weekend as a student ambassador - it's a lot of fun, and a good chance to get to know the people you might be sharing a classroom with (both the faculty and the students). The cruise is particularly cool; just don't picture a gigantic yacht, it's just a harbor cruise, haha.

Halibut6 wrote:They have to make some big changes just to get into the top 100.

Let me preface this by saying that I don't mean to sound defensive, I actually do want to know the answer because it's hard for a current student to get an outside perspective. What changes do you think they need to make?

Chapman UG has a really strong drama program

they've been pumping $$$$ into their law school and its scholarship program, but its hard to say where it will go, especially with UCI nearby

Any of you with a full scolly think it might be possible to negotiate for a living stipend with chapman?? I just got a full ride from a top 100 (out of Cali ) so maybe Chapman could bump it up somehow Top 100 school = $16,000/year living expenses + top 33% requirement, yet Chapman i could practice in Cali and live with my aunt so the living stipend would give me money to spend and it's a 3.0 to maintain. Obviously a top 100 would be best, it's getting to the point where the decision is coming down to $$$ grrrrr!

As far as I know, Chapman doesn't do stipends.

MixedGirl2009 wrote:Any of you with a full scolly think it might be possible to negotiate for a living stipend with chapman?? I just got a full ride from a top 100 (out of Cali ) so maybe Chapman could bump it up somehow Top 100 school = $16,000/year living expenses + top 33% requirement, yet Chapman i could practice in Cali and live with my aunt so the living stipend would give me money to spend and it's a 3.0 to maintain. Obviously a top 100 would be best, it's getting to the point where the decision is coming down to $$$ grrrrr!

According to LSAC data, 1.8% of Chapman Students receive more than full tuition. Thus, it might be possible, but I don't have any clue how much more than tuition they received (could just be books for all I know).

84Sunbird2000 wrote:

MixedGirl2009 wrote:Any of you with a full scolly think it might be possible to negotiate for a living stipend with chapman?? I just got a full ride from a top 100 (out of Cali ) so maybe Chapman could bump it up somehow Top 100 school = $16,000/year living expenses + top 33% requirement, yet Chapman i could practice in Cali and live with my aunt so the living stipend would give me money to spend and it's a 3.0 to maintain. Obviously a top 100 would be best, it's getting to the point where the decision is coming down to $$$ grrrrr!

According to LSAC data, 1.8% of Chapman Students receive more than full tuition. Thus, it might be possible, but I don't have any clue how much more than tuition they received (could just be books for all I know).

good to know!! i had only looked at data from the law school numbers website. I'm just waiting to hear back from 2 more schools then will decide on how to best bargain ..

I think for the first year that tuition is the most that chapman will do. Here's the page where I found that.

http://www.chapman.edu/admission/law/scholarships.asp

mjs92983 wrote:I think for the first year that tuition is the most that chapman will do. Here's the page where I found that.

http://www.chapman.edu/admission/law/scholarships.asp

+1, didn't work for me - almost immediate response although i have a lot of leverage

Chapman really doesn't need to do a whole lot more to get into tier 2.

Looking at Chapman's stats, it looks like they are easily a top 100 school. Without the reputation ratings in the USNews report, they have the GPA, LSAT, and bar passage rates (81% for July 2009) to not just sneak in to the top 100, but probably get close to 70-80 range. They also have a very low faculty/student ratio, and have a strong tax program that is ranked 17th. Right now, Chapman is probably in the upper half of the third tier, and if their reputation rises another .1/.2 in the peer assessment scores, that might be enough to bump them to the top 100.

The reputation ratings are the only thing holding Chapman back. Because they are a newer west coast school, they have to work harder to bring exposure to the school. However, they have good faculty, and their dean is running for state AG. I suspect that their reputation scores will continue to increase. Just a few years ago, the school had a 1.5 peer assessment, last year it was 1.9, and this year it will likely be at least 2.0. I beleive USNews now calculates a two year average for peer assessment scores, so if that is true, then last year the school received a 2.0 rating, and the year before they had a 1.8 ranking. Like I said earlier, even marginal increases can drastically change where you stand (Just look at what happened with Loyola) The school certainly possesses the resources the improve the school, and it has been doing so the last few years. Right now, the school compares well with schools like McGeorge, USF, and even Santa Clara.

With respect to UCI Law, I don't think that Chapman will hurt much, if at all from them. UCI, once they approved by the ABA, will probably get mostly tier 1 students matriculating there. At its peak, Chapman will probably compete with the tier 2 schools for tier 2 talent.

Like I said above, looking at the stats, Chapman should be a top 100 school. It shouldn't take much longer, as long as they continue to improve the school. I don't think they can get it this year, but if you go to Chapman, I would be shocked if they didn't crack top 100 by your 2L year. They are close and just need faculty members from other schools to be more objective and stop trying to keep their competition down.

As far as job prospects, Chapman will get you the same bang for your buck as most tier 2 schools. If you have a full scholarship, you should really consider going to Chapman if you aren't getting much money from Loyola/Pepperdine/USD. Now if you got an acceptance from Hastings/UCLA/USC, you would be pretty dumb to ditch that opportunity. But the difference between tier 2, and a school that should be tier 2 (Chapman), is marginal. When you are staring at little debt going to Chapman versus 100-200k going to Pepperdine, to me you go to Chapman. Most tier 2 schools aren't going to have 25% of their top students going to big firms. They still have only about 10% going big law. Chapman's is probably top 5%. Most tier 2 students end up in small firms just like Chapman. The only problem with Chapman is the alumni base is still small, so if you can't sell yourself if the legal profession, you might need a larger alumni base. But if your good with people, then you don't need them.

dcm81 wrote:Like I said above, looking at the stats, Chapman should be a top 100 school. It shouldn't take much longer, as long as they continue to improve the school. I don't think they can get it this year, but if you go to Chapman, I would be shocked if they didn't crack top 100 by your 2L year. They are close and just need faculty members from other schools to be more objective and stop trying to keep their competition down.

As far as job prospects, Chapman will get you the same bang for your buck as most tier 2 schools. If you have a full scholarship, you should really consider going to Chapman if you aren't getting much money from Loyola/Pepperdine/USD. Now if you got an acceptance from Hastings/UCLA/USC, you would be pretty dumb to ditch that opportunity. But the difference between tier 2, and a school that should be tier 2 (Chapman), is marginal. When you are staring at little debt going to Chapman versus 100-200k going to Pepperdine, to me you go to Chapman. Most tier 2 schools aren't going to have 25% of their top students going to big firms. They still have only about 10% going big law. Chapman's is probably top 5%. Most tier 2 students end up in small firms just like Chapman. The only problem with Chapman is the alumni base is still small, so if you can't sell yourself if the legal profession, you might need a larger alumni base. But if your good with people, then you don't need them.

+1

what does +1 mean?

dcm81 wrote:what does +1 mean?

That I agree with you. I also wanted in on this thread.

dcm81 wrote:Like I said above, looking at the stats, Chapman should be a top 100 school. It shouldn't take much longer, as long as they continue to improve the school. I don't think they can get it this year, but if you go to Chapman, I would be shocked if they didn't crack top 100 by your 2L year. They are close and just need faculty members from other schools to be more objective and stop trying to keep their competition down.

As far as job prospects, Chapman will get you the same bang for your buck as most tier 2 schools. If you have a full scholarship, you should really consider going to Chapman if you aren't getting much money from Loyola/Pepperdine/USD. Now if you got an acceptance from Hastings/UCLA/USC, you would be pretty dumb to ditch that opportunity. But the difference between tier 2, and a school that should be tier 2 (Chapman), is marginal. When you are staring at little debt going to Chapman versus 100-200k going to Pepperdine, to me you go to Chapman. Most tier 2 schools aren't going to have 25% of their top students going to big firms. They still have only about 10% going big law. Chapman's is probably top 5%. Most tier 2 students end up in small firms just like Chapman. The only problem with Chapman is the alumni base is still small, so if you can't sell yourself if the legal profession, you might need a larger alumni base. But if your good with people, then you don't need them.

my issue right now is that chapman is offering a full scholarship, and loyola is offering 17k. over thirty years its about $400 difference in loan payments per month. i really can't figure out if loyola is worth 400 a month more for the rest of my working life. chapmans estimated cost of living is 25k, so even a full scholarship means a good amount of debt, and i don't know if i can trust their job prospects.

I think I'm putting my deposit down soon

MixedGirl2009 wrote:I think I'm putting my deposit down soon

what was the deciding factor? where else are you considering

my issue right now is that chapman is offering a full scholarship, and loyola is offering 17k. over thirty years its about $400 difference in loan payments per month. i really can't figure out if loyola is worth 400 a month more for the rest of my working life. chapmans estimated cost of living is 25k, so even a full scholarship means a good amount of debt, and i don't know if i can trust their job prospects.[/quote]

400 is pretty good difference in the long run. Even in the short run it means you can probably afford to pay more off, cutting your total interest payments in the long run. Loyola is a better school, but you will also face stiffer competition between their students and yourself. So there is more of a chance that you will lose your scholarship at Loyola versus Chapman where you probably are a more qualified legal mind than a lot of their students. IF you can keep your scholarship at either school, you will have very good opportunities, and probably a little better at Loyola. What is it you want to do? I guess thats something you might want to think about too. If your aiming for a big firm job, you might want to retake the LSAT and try to get into UCLA/USC. If you want to be a federal prosecutor, Loyola is a better fit. DA/PD? Either school works. Small firm, the same. Judicial clerk? Marginally better chance at Loyola. Public interest? Same.... Just realize in this economy, scholarship money and KEEPING it are huge.

You also don't need 25k to live in orange county/LA a year unless you want to pay 1300-1400 a month for your own place.

dcm81 wrote:my issue right now is that chapman is offering a full scholarship, and loyola is offering 17k. over thirty years its about $400 difference in loan payments per month. i really can't figure out if loyola is worth 400 a month more for the rest of my working life. chapmans estimated cost of living is 25k, so even a full scholarship means a good amount of debt, and i don't know if i can trust their job prospects.

400 is pretty good difference in the long run. Even in the short run it means you can probably afford to pay more off, cutting your total interest payments in the long run. Loyola is a better school, but you will also face stiffer competition between their students and yourself. So there is more of a chance that you will lose your scholarship at Loyola versus Chapman where you probably are a more qualified legal mind than a lot of their students. IF you can keep your scholarship at either school, you will have very good opportunities, and probably a little better at Loyola. What is it you want to do? I guess thats something you might want to think about too. If your aiming for a big firm job, you might want to retake the LSAT and try to get into UCLA/USC. If you want to be a federal prosecutor, Loyola is a better fit. DA/PD? Either school works. Small firm, the same. Judicial clerk? Marginally better chance at Loyola. Public interest? Same.... Just realize in this economy, scholarship money and KEEPING it are huge.

You also don't need 25k to live in orange county/LA a year unless you want to pay 1300-1400 a month for your own place.[/quote]
i don't know what i want to do after law school, i want options. i'd like the option of a nice firm job, but also the flexibility of low debt.
have you chosen chapman?

twintipping_bumps wrote:In addition to a full scholarship, I just got a letter from Chapman about an all expenses paid trip to campus that includes a cruise on a yacht. I mean, that's pretty serious.

Personally, I think this topic is a complete and utter failure up until this point:

NSFW

Now that you have been redeemed you may continue.