What's the word on UCI? Forum

[06102016]

..

[BoGuaGua]

all UCs r better than any other public schools in the country

With all the budget-cuts and furloughs, it looks like this might not be the case for long, at least from a cost perspective.

Unfortunately true... fucking Texas, man.

do they even teach evolution in that state?

[bhan87]

whatever, happy UC family, all UCs r better than any other public schools in the country, f.ck UNC or Washington or Minnesota or any other garbage TTTTs

University of Michigan is probably close to the quality of UCB or UCLA, and definitely better than the mid-level UCs... UVA is pretty up there too.

[whitman]

.

[twenty]

I hope that this thread serves as a warning to potential law students that want to know what their classmates will be like.

[ndirish2010]

Enjoy it while it lasts, UC people. Your system is going down the tubes along with your state.

[HBBJohnStamos]

all UCs r better than any other public schools in the country

oh hey sup

- the state of virginia

[06102016]

..

[6thbackstreetboy]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

[somewhatwayward]

GPA / SAT Averages for 2012

UCB 4.16 / 2067

UCLA 4.11 / 2042

UCSD 4.07 / 1991

UCD 4.03 / 1901
UCI 4.02 / 1844
UCSB 3.96 / 1903

UCSC 3.78 / 1756
UCM 3.57 / 1617
UCR 3.70 / 1711

LOL grade inflation

Someone was asking about out-of-state perspective on the relative prestige of the UC schools. As a senior in high school in the Northeast, I applied to Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD but went elsewhere for college in the end. My sense before applying was that Berkeley and UCLA were national schools, with a slight edge to Berkeley, while UCSD was not national. Through the application process I learned from someone (maybe college counseling?) that UCSD was "third" best but before that I thought of all of the rest in one group. My understanding since then has been basically the same (UCB>UCLA>>>UCSD). I know that UCM, UCR, and possibly UCSC are considered the bottom tier.

If I was an employer choosing between people for a job, I would not be drawing fine distinctions between the group in the middle. I would probably consider UCI=UCD=UCSB=UCSC=UCSD(possibly wrt UCSD). I am talking about undergraduate institutions.

[dingbat]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

[Tiago Splitter]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

Unfortunately it won't, since those numbers are very close to those of the inaugural class. Actual info on the medians might help though.

[somewhatwayward]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

why would you hope that?

[dingbat]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

why would you hope that?

Because people have been talking about UCI coming in at T20 since before classes started, but it's not gonna happen. If it does happen, it'd just be a single year fluke because they gamed the system. There's no way that a new law school is going to come in and compete with 2 local powerhouses (UCLA/USC) from day one. It doesn't stand to reason.

Does UCI have a better shot than most new law schools at doing fairly well right from the start? Yes. But that means it has a chance at T1 instead of being a new TTT, not a chance at being one of the best in the nation. It'd be an amazing accomplishment if they start on par with San Diego, or Loyola, considering they have no reputation and no alumni base. Expecting them to compete with UCLA/USC is preposterous.

So, every time I hear someone say UCI will be T20 in the initial rankings, or a top school right away, I shudder in disbelief. It defies logic and reason, something lawyers should be good at.

[Golden Bear 11]

Hmm.. number wise UCI right now is comparable with Minn, GW, UWash, all ranked #20. But isn't a significant part of the rankings based on a reputation score? If it was pure numbers (GPA/LSAT) UCLA/Vandy would be in the t14 and Cornell wouldn't be

[bhan87]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

why would you hope that?

Because people have been talking about UCI coming in at T20 since before classes started, but it's not gonna happen. If it does happen, it'd just be a single year fluke because they gamed the system. There's no way that a new law school is going to come in and compete with 2 local powerhouses (UCLA/USC) from day one. It doesn't stand to reason.

Does UCI have a better shot than most new law schools at doing fairly well right from the start? Yes. But that means it has a chance at T1 instead of being a new TTT, not a chance at being one of the best in the nation. It'd be an amazing accomplishment if they start on par with San Diego, or Loyola, considering they have no reputation and no alumni base. Expecting them to compete with UCLA/USC is preposterous.

So, every time I hear someone say UCI will be T20 in the initial rankings, or a top school right away, I shudder in disbelief. It defies logic and reason, something lawyers should be good at.

Lawyers also care veeeeery deeply about USNWR rankings

[dingbat]

why would you hope that?

Because people have been talking about UCI coming in at T20 since before classes started, but it's not gonna happen. If it does happen, it'd just be a single year fluke because they gamed the system. There's no way that a new law school is going to come in and compete with 2 local powerhouses (UCLA/USC) from day one. It doesn't stand to reason.

Does UCI have a better shot than most new law schools at doing fairly well right from the start? Yes. But that means it has a chance at T1 instead of being a new TTT, not a chance at being one of the best in the nation. It'd be an amazing accomplishment if they start on par with San Diego, or Loyola, considering they have no reputation and no alumni base. Expecting them to compete with UCLA/USC is preposterous.

So, every time I hear someone say UCI will be T20 in the initial rankings, or a top school right away, I shudder in disbelief. It defies logic and reason, something lawyers should be good at.

Lawyers also care veeeeery deeply about USNWR rankings

In terms of hiring, UCLA and USC can barely place 1/3 of the class in biglaw. With the ongoing reputation of the schools and the alumni base, why would an employer in SoCal choose someone from untested UCI over UCLA/USC, which have a strong alumni base in the region? What about San Diego, or Loyola, or any of the other law schools? As an employer, I'd be sceptical

[BoGuaGua]

i disagree that if uci places top 20, then it will be a fluke, i think if uci is able to establish a strong first ranking, it will only benefit its applicants pool and reputation to make future gaming of rankings easier for the school

[zman]

GPA are not that good but what is their median. It's got to be at least 167 to even have a chance at top 20 and it doesn't look like it is.

[tectonic]

Does anyone have any insight in to what UCI's OCI is like? Is it the same group of firms as with USC and UCLA?

[timbs4339]

Hmm.. number wise UCI right now is comparable with Minn, GW, UWash, all ranked #20. But isn't a significant part of the rankings based on a reputation score? If it was pure numbers (GPA/LSAT) UCLA/Vandy would be in the t14 and Cornell wouldn't be

UCI is hoping that their faculty rep score will more than make up for any small deficit in numbers. It's smart because faculty rep is equally weighted in USNWR to LSAT/GPA selectivity. UCI already has a faculty that has been ranked in the top 10 in terms of output and a big name dean. Dean Chem should also help them with name recognition among lawyers, as everyone knows him from Con Law.

The ultimate problem for UCI is that it really offers nothing different than any of the other schools 25-50 when they key up to a full class size/tuition (there are only so many federal judges your professors have clout with), and all those schools are bad investments at sticker right now. People know this, especially people in the mid-to-high 160s who are foregoing law school. There are just fewer of them to go around, and once UCI posts real employment and tuition figures (not held down by a small class size or scholarships) students aren't going to go there over UCLA/USC.

[dingbat]

Hmm.. number wise UCI right now is comparable with Minn, GW, UWash, all ranked #20. But isn't a significant part of the rankings based on a reputation score? If it was pure numbers (GPA/LSAT) UCLA/Vandy would be in the t14 and Cornell wouldn't be

UCI is hoping that their faculty rep score will more than make up for any small deficit in numbers. It's smart because faculty rep is equally weighted in USNWR to LSAT/GPA selectivity. UCI already has a faculty that has been ranked in the top 10 in terms of output and a big name dean. Dean Chem should also help them with name recognition among lawyers, as everyone knows him from Con Law.

The ultimate problem for UCI is that it really offers nothing different than any of the other schools 25-50 when they key up to a full class size/tuition (there are only so many federal judges your professors have clout with), and all those schools are bad investments at sticker right now. People know this, especially people in the mid-to-high 160s who are foregoing law school. There are just fewer of them to go around, and once UCI posts real employment and tuition figures (not held down by a small class size or scholarships) students aren't going to go there over UCLA/USC.

A big problem with the reputation part which works to UCI's advantage, is that if a respondent admits to having no knowledge of a school's reputation, this result is removed. Therefore, if only 10 responses have any input on UCI's reputation, their reputation score will be the average of those 10 responses.
This means "never heard of 'em" or "can't say anything about 'em", which should be a negative result, is discounted

[LSTfan]

.

[bhan87]

Class of 2015 profile is up now. Not bad considering the drop in LSAT takers and the class size increasing by 30. I guess the lack of a blanket scholarship this year didn't destroy UCI's numbers like many predicted...

Class size: 119
75% LSAT: 167
25% LSAT: 162
75% GPA: 3.68
25% GPA: 3.29

No medians yet though.

I hope this'll end talks of UCI being T20 secure

why would you hope that?

Because opening the eighth first tier/top 50 law school in the state of California during a down economy was an act of pure hubris and needs to be punished. Whether it miraculously lands in the top 20 and proceeds to take jobs from UCLA and USC grads, or it, more likely, lands in the lower half of the first tier and takes jobs away from Davis and Hastings grads, it was a pointless exercise.

The seven California law schools ranked in the first tier already combine to graduate over 5,500 lawyers every year. Add to that the fact that California is a very popular choice for T14 grads, and the fact that the very top grads of the lower ranked schools in the region are also competitive, and we have a massively oversaturated legal market.

Seriously, what was the f-ing point of this school? As far as I can tell, it's role in the law school system will be to serve that niche of SoCal kids that are (i) too dumb for UCLA or USC, (ii) too smart for Loyola or USD, and (iii) too provincial to make the long trek to UCD or Hastings.

So yeah, I hope it debuts low in the first tier and this starts a death spiral of bad consequences.

Sounds like someone got rejected from California law schools

[3ThrowAway99]

11/58 apparently got federal clerkships (3 others got state clerkships is what i understand from the articles i've read). the rankings went, Yale > Stanford > UCI > Harvard

Post stats to back up your purported clerkship stats/rankings.