Top Law Schools

Do you think a full tuition scholarship is worth the risk? I don't think the school will go belly up and they have great teachers, but I have no idea when it will be ranked because I thought it was going to be ranked this year...
If I want to stay local in Southern California would this really be a dangerous idea?

Becca003 wrote:Do you think a full tuition scholarship is worth the risk?

No.

If I want to stay local in Southern California would this really be a dangerous idea?

Yes.
Full rides are not free rides. You have to factor cost of living for three years and missed opportunity costs.

What are your numbers?

not advisable. UCLA or USC are much better choices for this purpose. USC has been giving tons of money for decent lsats.

Don't know your situation, but I'm going to assume the best advice is:

retake

FUCK UCI

You, in another thread wrote:Urm, 165, 3.98 lsac converted

What on god's green earth are you doing not retaking the LSAT. Stanford (if you picked up a 167 or so) is totally in the cards here if you want to stay in California.

jesus fuck

twenty wrote:

You, in another thread wrote:Urm, 165, 3.98 lsac converted

What on god's green earth are you doing not retaking the LSAT. Stanford (if you picked up a 167 or so) is totally in the cards here if you want to stay in California.

+2. Max out your retakes and get that LSAT score as high as possible. If you're Cali or bust, don't settle for anything less than Stanford or Berkeley and if you have connections to southern California, then UCLA and USC w/ a full ride or close to it.

I'd also recommend canvassing the rest of the T6 because one will probably throw something nice at you. With like a 168 you might get some good $$ from CCN. A 170, which is entirely possible and you'll be choosing between YHS and probably a Ruby.

I think UCI can work for some people when it's free, but you can do so much better. Don't settle.

you're honestly pretty close (if not already there) to getting a full ride from USC. You have to retake, but there is absolutely no way you should give UCI any consideration.

With a full tuition scholarship I guess you could do worse, but having interviewed UCI candidates I can say that the school's practice of not ranking its graduates is a huge detriment. We end up just having to guess at some kid's rank, and "maybe something like top-10%" is going to lose out to "top-10%" every single time.

Terrible school. mod edit: do not out people's law schools when they haven't made that info public. Doing so earns you a ban.

Jesus wants you to retake.

Why are you all so dead set against it though? Because it could go belly up or because it doesn't have a solid reputation yet? I am just wondering why it would be such a bad idea since they have pretty good employment numbers and placements?

Becca003 wrote:Why are you all so dead set against it though? Because it could go belly up or because it doesn't have a solid reputation yet? I am just wondering why it would be such a bad idea since they have pretty good employment numbers and placements?

Why are you so dead set for it? They don't have good employment numbers or placement.
http://abovethelaw.com/schools/universi ... ia-irvine/

Holy fucking shit 26% unemployment, only 64% legal employment and 16% biglaw employment.

But if you're as hellbent on making awful life choices as you seem to be, go knock yourself out.

Becca003 wrote:Why are you all so dead set against it though? Because it could go belly up or because it doesn't have a solid reputation yet? I am just wondering why it would be such a bad idea since they have pretty good employment numbers and placements?

they do not in any way have good numbers or placement. Just wait for the numbers for the next couple cycles come in, too, they're going to be worse

also the premise of the school is p ridiculous and its an unabashed money grab

it is patently indefensible for someone in your position to even consider UCI

but hey it's your life, if you want to be a tard about your future, be lazy and not retake, and ignore the objective evidence that says you should do otherwise then go for it.

I mean, you could definitely do worse than UCI. I think it could be a good choice for some people.
However, a 165/3.98 URM can definitely do much better so it would not be a good choice for OP.

Dirigo wrote:I mean, you could definitely do worse than UCI. I think it could be a good choice for some people.
However, a 165/3.98 URM can definitely do much better so it would not be a good choice for OP.

I think that's right. UCI is on par with a few dozen other crappy-but-arguably-defensible-under-the-right-circumstances schools around the country. But it's impossible to defend for a URM with a 3.98.

I was just guessing but thanks for confirming.