UC Irvine Law Ranking Forum

[Mr. Matlock]

--ImageRemoved--

Please explain to me how this fits with Philosoraptor.

Unfunny

Well, I'm not sure if Philosoraptor is or is not the correct meme character, but the quote is fucking hilarious!! I glossed right over that gem of a "foot in mouth" moment.

AND, FWIW, Roscoe's are fucking amazing!!!!!!!

[d34d9823]

--ImageRemoved--

[tru]

.

[ViP]

They are going to fail because they won't get the reputation scores needed. TLS members don't guide the rankings, professors and judges do. Some deans/professors will love UCI, others won't even know where the hell UCI is. Judges/Partners won't have much to judge UCI by in terms of how they fare in the courtroom, so I doubt they are going to score in the 3 range there either. Their GPA/LSAT scores will assure them or a ranking somewhere in the top 50 range, but I would be shocked if they hit top 20 the first year out. If they did that would be a tremendous achievement that I doubt has ever been achieved by a law school in the USNews era of rankings.

25% of US News' rankings is based on peer assessment (assessment by law school deans and administrations)
- Law schools, professors, and deans have been nothing but hugely impressed and supportive (as noted in articles, mentioned by Chemerinsky, and explained to me by a T20 corporate law professor who's apparently very "in" with the world of "top" professors)

25% is based on selectivity (GPA, LSAT, acceptance rate)
- Let's assume Irvine will maintain T25 numbers at least until they feature in the rankings (not hard to believe considering we're only talking about a couple of years from now, and the first two classes have T20 numbers)

20% is based on bar passage rate
- Hardly the reason people think UCI will suffer in the rankings... I don't think anyone fears that Chem and the great faculty won't prepare UCI students well enough for the bar

15% is based on faculty resources (expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, library resources)
- This is a serious plus for UCI, considering the small size of the program particularly during the first few years

That equates to 85% that works in favor of UCI being T20 or T25, by my calculations. You can disagree with the extent of my optimisim, but I don't see how anything listed above will really hurt UCI's potential in the rankings...

The final 15% is for assessment scores by lawyers/judges. Those who are familiar with UCI (not many) are likely to give it strong scores (the few lawyers/judges that have dealt with UCI students thus far have been extremely impressed). Those who don't know UCI simply will decline to answer. They won't give them negative marks if they've never heard of them...

Even if that final 15% hurts UCI more than I expect, it will detract from T20 status (again, according to my breakdown above). Fine. So the school will be T25, T30, T40 (depending on your level of pessimism). But frankly, any prediction darker than that seems very implausible.

[clintonius]

--ImageRemoved--

This deserves more credit than it has received.

[tru]

.

[Mr. Matlock]

--ImageRemoved--

Please explain to me how this fits with Philosoraptor.

Unfunny

You lose.

I'm actually surprised no one else has come to the defense of Roscoes.

[Kilpatrick]

.

[savagedm]

two words: stop bitching

[psyers]

I happen to hate all this talk and focus on rankings, simply because I'm going to be a UCI student in the fall and I'm excited by the evident quality of the program. Period. I know what I'm personally in for, regardless of UCI's future in the rankings. Since this thread is specifically about UCI's potential in the rankings, though, here's my take (as I wrote in another thread):

25% of US News' rankings is based on peer assessment (assessment by law school deans and administrations)
- Law schools, professors, and deans have been nothing but hugely impressed and supportive (as noted in articles, mentioned by Chemerinsky, and explained to me by a T20 corporate law professor who's apparently very "in" with the world of "top" professors)

25% is based on selectivity (GPA, LSAT, acceptance rate)
- Let's assume Irvine will maintain T25 numbers at least until they feature in the rankings (not hard to believe considering we're only talking about a couple of years from now, and the first two classes have T20 numbers)

20% is based on bar passage rate
- Hardly the reason people think UCI will suffer in the rankings... I don't think anyone fears that Chem and the great faculty won't prepare UCI students well enough for the bar

15% is based on faculty resources (expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, library resources)
- This won't be hurting UCI's ranking... In fact, it will very likely boost it, considering the small size of the program particularly during the first few years

That equates to 85% that works in favor of UCI being T20 or T25, by my calculations. You can disagree with the extent of my optimisim, but I don't see how anything listed above will really hurt UCI's potential in the rankings...

The final 15% is for assessment scores by lawyers/judges. Those that are familiar with UCI (not many) are likely to give them strong scores (the few lawyers/judges that have dealt with UCI students thus far have been extremely impressed). Those that don't know UCI simply will decline to answer. They won't give them negative marks if they've never heard of them...

Even if that final 15% hurts UCI more than I expect, it will detract from T20 status (again, according to my breakdown above). Fine. So the school will be T25, T30, T40 (for the very pessimistic). But frankly, any prediction darker than that seems very implausible.

For the record, I think UCI will initially feature somewhere between 20-30 in the rankings.

Well said.

[SaintClarence27]

I happen to hate all this talk and focus on rankings, simply because I'm going to be a UCI student in the fall and I'm excited by the evident quality of the program. Period. I know what I'm personally in for, regardless of UCI's future in the rankings. Since this thread is specifically about UCI's potential in the rankings, though, here's my take (as I wrote in another thread):

25% of US News' rankings is based on peer assessment (assessment by law school deans and administrations)
- Law schools, professors, and deans have been nothing but hugely impressed and supportive (as noted in articles, mentioned by Chemerinsky, and explained to me by a T20 corporate law professor who's apparently very "in" with the world of "top" professors)

25% is based on selectivity (GPA, LSAT, acceptance rate)
- Let's assume Irvine will maintain T25 numbers at least until they feature in the rankings (not hard to believe considering we're only talking about a couple of years from now, and the first two classes have T20 numbers)

20% is based on bar passage rate
- Hardly the reason people think UCI will suffer in the rankings... I don't think anyone fears that Chem and the great faculty won't prepare UCI students well enough for the bar

15% is based on faculty resources (expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, library resources)
- This won't be hurting UCI's ranking... In fact, it will very likely boost it, considering the small size of the program particularly during the first few years

That equates to 85% that works in favor of UCI being T20 or T25, by my calculations. You can disagree with the extent of my optimisim, but I don't see how anything listed above will really hurt UCI's potential in the rankings...

The final 15% is for assessment scores by lawyers/judges. Those that are familiar with UCI (not many) are likely to give them strong scores (the few lawyers/judges that have dealt with UCI students thus far have been extremely impressed). Those that don't know UCI simply will decline to answer. They won't give them negative marks if they've never heard of them...

Even if that final 15% hurts UCI more than I expect, it will detract from T20 status (again, according to my breakdown above). Fine. So the school will be T25, T30, T40 (for the very pessimistic). But frankly, any prediction darker than that seems very implausible.

For the record, I think UCI will initially feature somewhere between 20-30 in the rankings.

Well said.

Eh, could've been better.

[dcm81]

They are going to fail because they won't get the reputation scores needed. TLS members don't guide the rankings, professors and judges do. Some deans/professors will love UCI, others won't even know where the hell UCI is. Judges/Partners won't have much to judge UCI by in terms of how they fare in the courtroom, so I doubt they are going to score in the 3 range there either. Their GPA/LSAT scores will assure them or a ranking somewhere in the top 50 range, but I would be shocked if they hit top 20 the first year out. If they did that would be a tremendous achievement that I doubt has ever been achieved by a law school in the USNews era of rankings.

I happen to hate all this talk and focus on rankings, simply because I'm going to be a UCI student in the fall and I'm excited by the evident quality of the program. Period. I know what I'm personally in for, regardless of UCI's future in the rankings. Since this thread is specifically about UCI's potential in the rankings, though, here's my take (as I wrote in another thread):

25% of US News' rankings is based on peer assessment (assessment by law school deans and administrations)
- Law schools, professors, and deans have been nothing but hugely impressed and supportive (as noted in articles, mentioned by Chemerinsky, and explained to me by a T20 corporate law professor who's apparently very "in" with the world of "top" professors)

25% is based on selectivity (GPA, LSAT, acceptance rate)
- Let's assume Irvine will maintain T25 numbers at least until they feature in the rankings (not hard to believe considering we're only talking about a couple of years from now, and the first two classes have T20 numbers)

20% is based on bar passage rate
- Hardly the reason people think UCI will suffer in the rankings... I don't think anyone fears that Chem and the great faculty won't prepare UCI students well enough for the bar

15% is based on faculty resources (expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, library resources)
- This won't be hurting UCI's ranking... In fact, it will very likely boost it, considering the small size of the program particularly during the first few years

That equates to 85% that works in favor of UCI being T20 or T25, by my calculations. You can disagree with the extent of my optimisim, but I don't see how anything listed above will really hurt UCI's potential in the rankings...

The final 15% is for assessment scores by lawyers/judges. Those that are familiar with UCI (not many) are likely to give them strong scores (the few lawyers/judges that have dealt with UCI students thus far have been extremely impressed). Those that don't know UCI simply will decline to answer. They won't give them negative marks if they've never heard of them...

Even if that final 15% hurts UCI more than I expect, it will detract from T20 status (again, according to my breakdown above). Fine. So the school will be T25, T30, T40 (for the very pessimistic). But frankly, any prediction darker than that seems very implausible.

For the record, I think UCI will initially feature somewhere between 20-30 in the rankings.

Good arguments but I doubt that schools in competition with UCI are going to be awarding UCI with 3's and 4's in their reputation rankings. What incentive do they have to place UCI as equals with UCLA/USC/Hastings? It's going to take some time to build up that respect. Respect isn't bought with lateral hires and inflated LSAT's brought on by matriculants who signed up for a free law school. UCI will rank well but 20-30 is a huge strtch. A new school does not deserve to be placed above UC schols like Davis and Hastings who have thousands of alumni who have contributed greatly to the legal profession in CA. I think its rather insulting for students and faculty members from UCI law to brag about their place in the rankings. Thats why so many people are going after UCI, people at UCI expect their top 20 ranking on a silver platter while the rest of the schools work their tails off to improve their schools to move bit by bit year after year. UCI's arrogance irrtates me.

[tru]

.

[Aberzombie1892]

This thread has lasted forever.

UCI will be a fine school. However, if one does not wish to practice in CA (and wait in line behind Berkeley, Stanford, USC, UCLA, and possibly Davis), then they shouldn't go.

It's ironic that if UCI lands behind Davis at say, 29, UCI would be the 6th best law school in CA. Heck, if it lands a 20, it will be the 5th best.

I think rank in comparison to peers in-state means more than rank compared to schools that UCI will not be competing with (i.e. every school that isn't in CA or schools that place less than 10% in CA shouldn't care at all).

[bk1]

This thread has lasted forever.

UCI will be a fine school. However, if one does not wish to practice in CA (and wait in line behind Berkeley, Stanford, USC, UCLA, and possibly Davis), then they shouldn't go.

It's ironic that if UCI lands behind Davis at say, 29, UCI would be the 6th best law school in CA. Heck, if it lands a 20, it will be the 5th best.

I think rank in comparison to peers in-state means more than rank compared to schools that UCI will not be competing with (i.e. every school that isn't in CA or schools that place less than 10% in CA shouldn't care at all).

True, but even rank in comparison to in-state peers is not that great. Is UCD stronger than UCH? Probably not, despite the rankings gap between them. UCI's graduate placement should be what people eventually decide on when determining the strength of the school. The way UCI is going about it, I think that they have a shot at having better placement at first (due to smaller class size and the effort with which they are trying to place their students), the question would remain whether they can maintain that sort of placement as class size increases, scholarships normalize, luster fades, and time goes by.

[tru]

.

[bk1]

Why wouldn't they? Scholarship, small sizes, strong numbers, placement - they did it last year and have it now. They're not running out of scholarship money. Their program has been planned out very well for over a decade. I've given you reasons why I think they will succeed. So what are your grounds to speculate that they will fail in a few years?

To be honest, I do not know their decade-long plan and I didn't mean that they would fail within a few years, I meant in the 10+ year time span (I understand that this time span isn't as important to those going to law school now). I don't mean that they will not be able to stay strong, but I mean that they will have to stop hemorrhaging money at some point and become self sustaining. I am speculating that their placement may suffer when they do not have the same money to draw applicants or, if they increase their class size, the same attention to getting their applicants jobs. I am not saying it will happen in a few years, I am saying that it may happen eventually because their MO has to change at some point and this change has the possibility of hurting them, though it is not necessarily so.

[tru]

.

[malfurion]

I don't mean that they will not be able to stay strong, but I mean that they will have to stop hemorrhaging money at some point and become self sustaining. I am speculating that their placement may suffer when they do not have the same money to draw applicants

I was pretty sure that all scholarships so far were covered through private donations, mostly from firms in the OC area (who presumably want to hire UCI grads, or they wouldn't be donating), not from the school itself or the state. Is that incorrect?

[tru]

.

[bk1]

Well then I am incorrect.

[1800calturk]

I know I'm reviving an old thread, but I didn't want to create a new one for this. Just wondering what people's thoughts are on UCI now that we've had another year of numbers. Seems to me that faculty is dropping like flies (is Ortiz even there anymore?) and the scholarship is no longer competitive with T30 (maybe they don't have to be?). I'm advising a close friend on whether she should choose a Irvine over a T20 that offered her $. I'm thinking no, but she wants to work in Cali eventually and didn't get into USC or UCLA. Does anyone have an idea how their 2Ls did? How'd their 1Ls do? I'm looking for som rational evaluation here, so uci kids, please don't jump down my throat.

[stratocophic]

I know I'm reviving an old thread, but I didn't want to create a new one for this. Just wondering what people's thoughts are on UCI now that we've had another year of numbers. Seems to me that faculty is dropping like flies (is Ortiz even there anymore?) and the scholarship is no longer competitive with T30 (maybe they don't have to be?). I'm advising a close friend on whether she should choose a Irvine over a T20 that offered her $. I'm thinking no, but she wants to work in Cali eventually and didn't get into USC or UCLA. Does anyone have an idea how their 2Ls did? How'd their 1Ls do? I'm looking for som rational evaluation here, so uci kids, please don't jump down my throat.

YOU SHUT YOU'RE LYING MOUTH UCI IS A T20



Be careful - these kids are crazy and they'll find you if you talk bad about UCI

[Danteshek]

Be careful - these kids are crazy and they'll find you if you talk bad about UCI

Agreed. Be Careful. UCI is a cult. They even have a charismatic leader in Chemerinsky who makes all sorts of grandiose pronouncements about rankings.

[bk1]

I know I'm reviving an old thread, but I didn't want to create a new one for this. Just wondering what people's thoughts are on UCI now that we've had another year of numbers. Seems to me that faculty is dropping like flies (is Ortiz even there anymore?) and the scholarship is no longer competitive with T30 (maybe they don't have to be?). I'm advising a close friend on whether she should choose a Irvine over a T20 that offered her $. I'm thinking no, but she wants to work in Cali eventually and didn't get into USC or UCLA. Does anyone have an idea how their 2Ls did? How'd their 1Ls do? I'm looking for som rational evaluation here, so uci kids, please don't jump down my throat.

UCI's 1/3 scholarship is soundly mediocre. Did she get into UCH or UCD with $? If the T20 is GW or WUSTL (which I'm betting it is) then it depends on how much $ they gave and how willing your friend is to have only a 10-20% shot at coming back to CA immediately.