Advice wanted- UCLA vs. USC vs. Boalt Forum

[zman]

Equal money go UCLA over USC(For the most part) but big law firms don't appear to have nearly as much respect for UCLA as they do for those ranked in the top 14 even though UCLA has better GPA's then quite a few of them. last year UCLA had a horrible year. only 23% got big law.

Why? If USC has better employment stats (and they do) then why is UCLA a clear cut choice at equal price? Prettier campus?

it's about even. UCLA has more in PI..

[crib]

Equal money go UCLA over USC(For the most part) but big law firms don't appear to have nearly as much respect for UCLA as they do for those ranked in the top 14 even though UCLA has better GPA's then quite a few of them. last year UCLA had a horrible year. only 23% got big law.

Just came in to comment on the "USC places better than UCLA in Biglaw" thing, which maybe true, but a LOT of people at UCLA don't shoot for Biglaw jobs -- FYI. A significant portion of the class doesn't even do OCI with the big firms. This may be reflected in the total % of biglaw placement at UCLA (a stretch to say big firms "don't respect UCLA"). Not sure how that compares to USC.

[BigZuck]

Considering UCLA is stoopid expensive and their LRAP is weak (from what I understand at least) then why are kids opting into PI? They want to drown in debt? Or am I misunderstanding how good their LRAP is? Honest question. Because I would think if they are passing on big law when they could have gotten it and instead choosing PI then there must be a way for them to pay off big debt.

[Tiago Splitter]

Considering UCLA is stoopid expensive and their LRAP is weak (from what I understand at least) then why are kids opting into PI? They want to drown in debt? Or am I misunderstanding how good their LRAP is? Honest question. Because I would think if they are passing on big law when they could have gotten it and instead choosing PI then there must be a way for them to pay off big debt.

PSLF forgives the whole thing if you can survive ten years. IBR limits the payments.

[BigZuck]

Considering UCLA is stoopid expensive and their LRAP is weak (from what I understand at least) then why are kids opting into PI? They want to drown in debt? Or am I misunderstanding how good their LRAP is? Honest question. Because I would think if they are passing on big law when they could have gotten it and instead choosing PI then there must be a way for them to pay off big debt.

PSLF forgives the whole thing if you can survive ten years. IBR limits the payments.

But these are just government programs right? Conceivably you could get the same deal as a Loyola grad, although probably with much less initial debt. Or is the thinking that unless you went to UCLA you wouldn't get that job anyway because you need the prestige of the UCLA degree to even get the job?

[Lasers]

Just came in to comment on the "USC places better than UCLA in Biglaw" thing, which maybe true, but a LOT of people at UCLA don't shoot for Biglaw jobs -- FYI. A significant portion of the class doesn't even do OCI with the big firms. This may be reflected in the total % of biglaw placement at UCLA (a stretch to say big firms "don't respect UCLA"). Not sure how that compares to USC.

i don't buy this for a second. the likeliest reason usc outpaces ucla in big law placement is because firms consider the two schools to be peers. because of this, firms will hire roughly an equal amount of graduates from both schools, but since usc has about 100 students fewer than ucla does, it's placement percentage is much higher. additionally, usc's alumni network is stronger than ucla's.

so in effect, while usc and ucla are equal schools, because of usc's class size and alumni network, usc students have had a better shot at big law since the economy tanked.

[John_rizzy_rawls]

so in effect, while usc and ucla are equal schools, because of usc's class size and alumni network, usc students have had a better shot at big law since the economy tanked.

TITCR. When it comes to alumni network and lay prestige, especially in L.A., SC takes it.

[Tiago Splitter]

Considering UCLA is stoopid expensive and their LRAP is weak (from what I understand at least) then why are kids opting into PI? They want to drown in debt? Or am I misunderstanding how good their LRAP is? Honest question. Because I would think if they are passing on big law when they could have gotten it and instead choosing PI then there must be a way for them to pay off big debt.

PSLF forgives the whole thing if you can survive ten years. IBR limits the payments.

But these are just government programs right? Conceivably you could get the same deal as a Loyola grad, although probably with much less initial debt. Or is the thinking that unless you went to UCLA you wouldn't get that job anyway because you need the prestige of the UCLA degree to even get the job?

That's the problem with BigLaw too; go to the school with the higher job prospects and risk the debt, or go to the school with crappier prospects and risk never getting the job in the first place? I think with PSLF the bigger concern is not so much that the government will take it away but that it sort of locks you into a job for ten years if you manage to get one at all. If you decide 3 years out that you really want to get out from your PI gig but can't find another one, or get a nice offer (but perhaps not a real high-paying one) in the private sector, PSLF makes in so impracticable to change jobs.

so in effect, while usc and ucla are equal schools, because of usc's class size and alumni network, usc students have had a better shot at big law since the economy tanked.

TITCR. When it comes to alumni network and lay prestige, especially in L.A., SC takes it.

That wasn't the case in 2005 or 2010, and it was barely the case in other years.

[Lasers]

That wasn't the case in 2005 or 2010, and it was barely the case in other years.

2005 doesn't even matter; that was 8 years ago. even counting that and 2010, that would mean usc had the advantage 5 out of the past 7 years (note: it was a pretty sizable different last year as well). i don't think the stats do anything but corroborate what i said.

[Tiago Splitter]

That wasn't the case in 2005 or 2010, and it was barely the case in other years.

2005 doesn't even matter; that was 8 years ago. even counting that and 2010, that would mean usc had the advantage 5 out of the past 7 years (note: it was a pretty sizable different last year as well). i don't think the stats do anything but corroborate what i said.

2005 is as far back as we can go. The point is that the placement is very similar and neither clearly outpaces the other in BigLaw hiring.

But yeah, what I'm saying is consistent with your post; the difference in any year is explained by some self-selection differences. Your second point that ITE USC has better biglaw placement needs a few more years to play out. 2012 NLJ 250 numbers should be out any day now.

[Golden Bear 11]

ucla has about 30 students in each class in their public interest law program, so 30 students are most likely no biglaw from the beginning.

plus, i think it is fair to assume there are students outside the program who are committed to public interest work

[crib]

so in effect, while usc and ucla are equal schools, because of usc's class size and alumni network, usc students have had a better shot at big law since the economy tanked.

TITCR. When it comes to alumni network and lay prestige, especially only in L.A., SC takes it.

[Lasers]

so in effect, while usc and ucla are equal schools, because of usc's class size and alumni network, usc students have had a better shot at big law since the economy tanked.

TITCR. When it comes to alumni network and lay prestige, especially only in L.A., SC takes it.

true, but whatever marginal advantage ucla has outside of socal hasn't helped its overall numbers especially after the economy tanked. hopefully both schools performed (relatively) well when the new numbers come out.

choosing between the two, i still think usc would be the choice considering you have about 100 less students to compete against for roughly the same amount of hires between the two schools. personally, this was my calculus when i decided.