UC Irvine $$ v. USC

[1800calturk]

I just learned that you cannot transfer out of UCI due to its lack of accreditation.

So If you have any hopes of transferring into T14 you might want to consider that.

... that is a huge consideration I would have never thought of. Seriously?

I wouldn't go to a school with a plan to transfer. Is it even worth transferring after 1/3 of your LS education is over? I mean you gain reputation, but you lose all the contacts, faculty relationships, friendships, etc. and you have to move/readjust all over again. Not to mention the awkwardness of asking one of your 1L profs to write a letter of rec to leave his school.

That said I'm not one to limit my options, does UCI's lack of accreditation have any other negative effects?

[1800calturk]

So I am VERY heavily leaning towards USC at this point, here's why...

- EMPLOYMENT. USC has a proven track record in terms of employment at the kind of prestigious firms I aspire to be at. Although UCI has a lot of OC buzz and a reputable faculty pulling for each student's employment, I feel that when the rubber hits the road, firms will go for the known quantity - especially if a healthy portion of their current employees are from the same school you are from. Every job I've ever gotten has been at least partly attributed to networking and my personal connections with people. I believe USC can't be beat in this regard.

- ENVIRONMENT. I am getting more and more excited about living in LA. It's one of the world's great cities, and it offers not only glitz glamor, but unlimited opportunities. You're around the entertainment industry, and the city just feels so alive. The USC campus is GORGEOUS, as are the people on it. Movies and TV shows are shot there on a regular basis. The UCI area may be cleaner and more relaxed, LA seems like the place to be for the young and ambitious.

-MOBILITY. As someone said, if you want hopes of transferring, UCI may have some problems. Also, UCI doesn't have abroad programs, which I'm not sure if I'll be interested, but at UCI it's not even an option. Further, USC is more mobile in the sense that it is more recognized in other parts of the country. Whether or not the degree carries to employment, USC Law is heard of everywhere. I also believe a USC grad will have an easier time finding work in OC, rather than a UCI grad in LA.

- OPPORTUNITY. At UCI, a big draw for me was being one of the founding classes and getting to shape the program. The problem with that is that you're personal influence is debatable, and further, you are shaping the program for future generations of UCI student. I'd like to have the opportunity to join established student groups with established connections and networks, established abroad programs and journals, which I will have the opportunity to explore and join. It's easier to influence the direction of something existing by shaping it, rather than having to create what you can from the resources available. I can still be a leader in the school's available institutions, and having all of USC's time-tested resources at my finger tips can translate to more freedom than if I was restricted by what's made available by a greenhorn institution.

- PRESTIGE. Getting into USC was a huge deal for me and my friends and family. I will readily admit that what others think of me is a factor in my ambitions, and while not my primary motivation, it just feels good when people are impressed with what you are doing with your life. UCI still has the "huh? they have a law school?" response, and since the undergrad is nothing special by UC standards, the lay-prestige is not really there. I'm also worried about the long term prestige of the school, when UCI finally hits its 300 student class sizes, standard UC scholarship practices, and loses the hype of being the new kid. Would I be bummed that the degree hanging on my wall 10 years from now isn't from USC?

Everything else - the awesomeness of professors, the friendliness of students, the collegial atmosphere and small class sizes - is pretty comparable. Obviously UCI's class sizes are tiny and you'll get a lot more personal face time with the profs, so if that is a huge factor, UCI takes the cake. However, USC's class sizes are small by most standards anyway and will stay that way. UCI is the clear winner in the $ department.

THE BOTTOM LINE

UCI is still the friendly cute one who seems very down to earth and that I'd enjoy taking strolls in the park with. UCI dotes on me and gives me a lot of good reasons to go that way. But USC is the smokin' hottie I can't believe I actually have a chance with, and also genuinely seems interested in me, although admittedly doesn't pay me as much attention. I've only just met both of them, so it's hard to judge how well I'd vibe with either for the long haul, but as of now it looks like I'll have to ask UCI if we can just be friends. I mean sure I like it, but do I like like it?

[ruleser]

So I am VERY heavily leaning towards USC at this point, here's why...

- EMPLOYMENT. USC has a proven track record in terms of employment at the kind of prestigious firms I aspire to be at. Although UCI has a lot of OC buzz and a reputable faculty pulling for each student's employment, I feel that when the rubber hits the road, firms will go for the known quantity - especially if a healthy portion of their current employees are from the same school you are from. Every job I've ever gotten has been at least partly attributed to networking and my personal connections with people. I believe USC can't be beat in this regard.

- ENVIRONMENT. I am getting more and more excited about living in LA. It's one of the world's great cities, and it offers not only glitz glamor, but unlimited opportunities. You're around the entertainment industry, and the city just feels so alive. The USC campus is GORGEOUS, as are the people on it. Movies and TV shows are shot there on a regular basis. The UCI area may be cleaner and more relaxed, LA seems like the place to be for the young and ambitious.

-MOBILITY. As someone said, if you want hopes of transferring, UCI may have some problems. Also, UCI doesn't have abroad programs, which I'm not sure if I'll be interested, but at UCI it's not even an option. Further, USC is more mobile in the sense that it is more recognized in other parts of the country. Whether or not the degree carries to employment, USC Law is heard of everywhere. I also believe a USC grad will have an easier time finding work in OC, rather than a UCI grad in LA.

- OPPORTUNITY. At UCI, a big draw for me was being one of the founding classes and getting to shape the program. The problem with that is that you're personal influence is debatable, and further, you are shaping the program for future generations of UCI student. I'd like to have the opportunity to join established student groups with established connections and networks, established abroad programs and journals, which I will have the opportunity to explore and join. It's easier to influence the direction of something existing by shaping it, rather than having to create what you can from the resources available. I can still be a leader in the school's available institutions, and having all of USC's time-tested resources at my finger tips can translate to more freedom than if I was restricted by what's made available by a greenhorn institution.

- PRESTIGE. Getting into USC was a huge deal for me and my friends and family. I will readily admit that what others think of me is a factor in my ambitions, and while not my primary motivation, it just feels good when people are impressed with what you are doing with your life. UCI still has the "huh? they have a law school?" response, and since the undergrad is nothing special by UC standards, the lay-prestige is not really there. I'm also worried about the long term prestige of the school, when UCI finally hits its 300 student class sizes, standard UC scholarship practices, and loses the hype of being the new kid. Would I be bummed that the degree hanging on my wall 10 years from now isn't from USC?

Everything else - the awesomeness of professors, the friendliness of students, the collegial atmosphere and small class sizes - is pretty comparable. Obviously UCI's class sizes are tiny and you'll get a lot more personal face time with the profs, so if that is a huge factor, UCI takes the cake. However, USC's class sizes are small by most standards anyway and will stay that way. UCI is the clear winner in the $ department.

THE BOTTOM LINE

UCI is still the friendly cute one who seems very down to earth and that I'd enjoy taking strolls in the park with. UCI dotes on me and gives me a lot of good reasons to go that way. But USC is the smokin' hottie I can't believe I actually have a chance with, and also genuinely seems interested in me, although admittedly doesn't pay me as much attention. I've only just met both of them, so it's hard to judge how well I'd vibe with either for the long haul, but as of now it looks like I'll have to ask UCI if we can just be friends. I mean sure I like it, but do I like like it?

If you were going to use that metaphor, you should have gotten in right: you know for a fact that USC puts out, at least 25%-50% of the time, if things are going well even more.... while you don't know for sure that UCI will ever be able to put out at all (access to Big Law/top jobs being the eqivalent of sex in this one)

[Stupendous_Man]

I have a similar situation, and I'm waiting to visit all the options I'm seriously considering before making my decision. I'm hoping what everyone says about getting a "feel" for the school will just magically make sense to me once I'm there! Goodluck and congrats!

[lakerfanimal]

I wrote in both applications that I was interested in corporate. I think both schools are looking for all kinds.

Right but USC has more resources and the name to help you more with the corporate route in my opinion.

Just today one of my friends who is waiting on USC but got into UCI said he won't automatically go to USC even if he gets in. We agreed that UCI just has huge boom or bust potential, but the boom potential we decided was bigger for many reasons people have already mentioned (too many big-name reputations put on the line for the success of the school). That being said, I think at best UCI in the next few years still won't be as big for you in getting into corporate law as USC will be, OC or LA. Good luck!

Edit- sounds like you know where you're going!

[Stupendous_Man]

I wrote in both applications that I was interested in corporate. I think both schools are looking for all kinds.

Right but USC has more resources and the name to help you more with the corporate route in my opinion.

Just today one of my friends who is waiting on USC but got into UCI said he won't automatically go to USC even if he gets in. We agreed that UCI just has huge boom or bust potential, but the boom potential we decided was bigger for many reasons people have already mentioned (too many big-name reputations put on the line for the success of the school). That being said, I think at best UCI in the next few years still won't be as big for you in getting into corporate law as USC will be, OC or LA. Good luck!

Edit- sounds like you know where you're going!

Right so, does your friend think that UCI's boom potential is bigger than USC current potential? What a lot of people are saying is that in UCI's best case scenario (debuting in the top 20), it's still not going to trump what USC is already doing. For me, UCI makes a lot of sense for the public interest focused, and more so than USC just because you end up with a lot less debt, and the big name connections can make up for the lack of alumni network in PI. However, I gotta agree with lakerfanimal, I can't see how UCI can offer any advantage over USC in the corporate world.

[pany1985]

UCI could end up being about equal to USC/UCLA for jobs in Orange County, which has a surprisingly large amount of biglaw jobs... although it's not that surprising when you look into it more, since OC is home a lot of corporate headquarters and has a population of about 3 million (which is actually a higher population density than Los Angeles County). The OC legal community is pretty jazzed about finally having a top law school in their backyard.

[ViP]

Big news today: every single member of UCI's first-year class has landed a summer job.

http://abovethelaw.com/2010/03/uc-irvin ... has-a-job/

[Stupendous_Man]

Big news today: every single member of UCI's first-year class has landed a summer job.

http://abovethelaw.com/2010/03/uc-irvin ... has-a-job/

That's nice, but it seems like Irvine is VERY public interest focused. Other schools fill public interest positions as well and also place in firm jobs so if Turk is looking to do private stuff, it seems like that article could be used to argue against UCI. Also, I feel like it's misleading when UCI uses percentages. For example, 60 employed students is 100% at UCI, but 30% at USC. USC could employ 50% of its students and that'd still be more than UCI. I get nervous when UCI is touted as the "most selective" and "highest employment rate" in the country. I guess a budding school needs that kind of hype to survive, but it's starting to sound like the same statistical hyperbole used in timeshare presentations.

[ViP]

Big news today: every single member of UCI's first-year class has landed a summer job.

http://abovethelaw.com/2010/03/uc-irvin ... has-a-job/

That's nice, but it seems like Irvine is VERY public interest focused. Other schools fill public interest positions as well and also place in firm jobs so if Turk is looking to do private stuff, it seems like that article could be used to argue against UCI. Also, I feel like it's misleading when UCI uses percentages. For example, 60 employed students is 100% at UCI, but 30% at USC. USC could employ 50% of its students and that'd still be more than UCI. I get nervous when UCI is touted as the "most selective" and "highest employment rate" in the country. I guess a budding school needs that kind of hype to survive, but it's starting to sound like the same statistical hyperbole used in timeshare presentations.

That's not misleading at all. The % is precisely what matters, not the absolute number.

If 100% of the students at your prospective school have jobs, doesn't that give you hope that you'll find a job if you attend that school (regardless of the absolute number of students)?

As per your example, if 50% of USC students have jobs, that's already way more than UCI. But so what? That also means 50% of USC students don't have jobs... Also way more than the 0% of UCI students that don't have jobs.

And I agree that Irvine is clearly PI focused, but half of the class is not interested in PI and they have jobs, too. I think the hype and prestige around the school has allowed students to pursue their own interests, regardless of the school's focus.

[Stupendous_Man]

No, because it's misleading to suggest UCI students have a 100% chance of getting a summer job than USC students because 100% of 60 students got a summer job. All you can safely say right now is that UCI was able to place 60 of its students in summer jobs. Everything else is just an assumption. Let's say for arguments sake there are 200 jobs in the country. If USC only places 50% of its students and UCI places 100% of its students, then USC claimed 50% of the jobs whereas UCI only got 30%. What happens if the number of jobs decreases? What happens when the number of UCI students increases? Percentages can be manipulated. Real numbers matter. Especially when you argue that 50% of its students took PI jobs.. The article says 30 students took PI jobs, and 17 took government jobs. So all you can really say is that UCI can place 13 people in firm jobs.

I'm not saying it's wrong or bad, 60/60 students employed is great. It just isn't the 100% employment rate it sounds like.

[ViP]

No, because it's misleading to suggest UCI students have a 100% chance of getting a summer job than USC students because 100% of 60 students got a summer job. All you can safely say right now is that UCI was able to place 60 of its students in summer jobs. Everything else is just an assumption. Let's say for arguments sake there are 200 jobs in the country. If USC only places 50% of its students and UCI places 100% of its students, then USC claimed 50% of the jobs whereas UCI only got 30%. What happens if the number of jobs decreases? What happens when the number of UCI students increases? Percentages can be manipulated. Real numbers matter. Especially when you argue that 50% of its students took PI jobs.. The article says 30 students took PI jobs, and 17 took government jobs. So all you can really say is that UCI can place 13 people in firm jobs.

I'm not saying it's wrong or bad, 60/60 students employed is great. It just isn't the 100% employment rate it sounds like.

You're absolutely right about private firm jobs. There's no way of telling how UCI students will hold-up with private firms. Only time will tell, so it's not fair to speak in hypotheticals.

But in terms of employment, the current numbers suggest you have a much, much greater chance (at least in the short-term) of getting an immediate summer job out of UCI than you would out of USC.

In 5 or 10 years, who knows what UCI's employment rate will be. At the moment, though, I don't see the 2nd or probably 3rd year class struggling to find employment (just what kind of employment, though- as you've rightly noted- is a different matter altogether).

To only say UCI was able to place 60 students, disregarding the 100% aspect of it, is understating your prospects of getting a job. At USC or any other school, who knows where you'll place? At UCI, who cares where you'll place (again, this is only pertinent for the next year or two. The distant future is unknown)? You are one of the 60 students that comprise the 100%. I know a UCLA 2L that can't find a summer job for the life of him (good student, too).

In summary, I totally understand and respect your point, but I think we're arguing slightly different things here (type of job, present vs. future, etc.).

[Stupendous_Man]

No, because it's misleading to suggest UCI students have a 100% chance of getting a summer job than USC students because 100% of 60 students got a summer job. All you can safely say right now is that UCI was able to place 60 of its students in summer jobs. Everything else is just an assumption. Let's say for arguments sake there are 200 jobs in the country. If USC only places 50% of its students and UCI places 100% of its students, then USC claimed 50% of the jobs whereas UCI only got 30%. What happens if the number of jobs decreases? What happens when the number of UCI students increases? Percentages can be manipulated. Real numbers matter. Especially when you argue that 50% of its students took PI jobs.. The article says 30 students took PI jobs, and 17 took government jobs. So all you can really say is that UCI can place 13 people in firm jobs.

I'm not saying it's wrong or bad, 60/60 students employed is great. It just isn't the 100% employment rate it sounds like.

You're absolutely right about private firm jobs. There's no way of telling how UCI students will hold-up with private firms. Only time will tell, so it's not fair to speak in hypotheticals.

But in terms of employment, the current numbers suggest you have a much, much greater chance (at least in the short-term) of getting an immediate summer job out of UCI than you would out of USC.

In 5 or 10 years, who knows what UCI's employment rate will be. At the moment, though, I don't see the 2nd or probably 3rd year class struggling to find employment (just what kind of employment, though- as you've rightly noted- is a different matter altogether).

To only say UCI was able to place 60 students, disregarding the 100% aspect of it, is understating your prospects of getting a job. At USC or any other school, who knows where you'll place? At UCI, who cares where you'll place (again, this is only pertinent for the next year or two. The distant future is unknown)? You are one of the 60 students that comprise the 100%. I know a UCLA 2L that can't find a summer job for the life of him (good student, too).

In summary, I totally understand and respect your point, but I think we're arguing slightly different things here (type of job, present vs. future, etc.).

I believe we agree on everything. I really hope you get into USC, good luck!