What happened to all the California school rankings? Forum

[Dr. Dre]

Last year, many criticized me for being too negative against California law schools. They couldn't fathom this swift decline in rankings and prestige. "But UCLA is a good school! And UC Irvine will break into the T14 - Dean Chemerinsky promised," they would say.

My goal wasn't to annoy or spam this board. I was trying to give insight into the California market — one that I know personally, with insider connections among various CA law schools. But, alas, the calamity facing CA law schools has reached public knowledge. And I am pleased TLS has finally accepted CA's decline in higher-education. I don't think they will weather this storm; I see further declines in the future.

So far, my job here is done. I will return when TLS needs me back.

[twenty]

Oh come now, we all know you weren't trying to help out poor little TLSers that might be duped into believing the lies of a dean who looked suspiciously like the villain from the first Indiana Jones, it was a shtick. A lot of people advocated that UCI would be exactly what it turned out to be -- a regional school you go to if you're getting a full ride, you don't care about/want biglaw, and you know there's a good chance you'll be unemployed. Instead of educating people on how bad the legal market in California was, you bullied them into feeling stupid.

For all the stats/advice/empirics/etc. helpful people offered on UCI's artificial status, your relentless abuse was probably more influential than all of us combined. Invariably, I'm the idiot who thinks solid reasoning is going to persuade 0Ls not to attend UCI, whereas what really seemed to work was your shtick. Congratulations. You deserve to be thanked by the dozens of people who decided not to go to UCI because of you (and thus make significantly better financial decisions).

The villain TLS needed, so to speak.

[redbull12]

As a california native Ill come right out and say the -2's at pepperdine and hastings after previous declines are shocking - they totally change the applicant field and expectation (which in turn will unleash a pedagogic nightmare on the institutions themselves via student quality starting with c/o 2015 and finalizing in 2017), but equally importantly, they will crush these schools in the rankings and destroy their local standing, total decay inside and out.

I remember when after my first shit LSAT score I considered applying in 2011, Pepperdine and Hastings were target schools for my numbers, with UCLA as somewhat of a reach. I mean, they were actually competitive. Now? holy shit. Idk. The fact so much can change in 2-3 years in incredible to me. Rarely do academic institutions, esp graduate programs experience such drastic declines and regional phase shifts

as a potential splitter, i am an auto reject at berkeley/stanford. that and as a norcal kid i hate socal and being debt-averse leave me with the options of NOTHING in terms of the state of california.

ucla/usc/davis/hastings/pepperdine all leave you with 200k+ debt and what job prospects? the best LST ranking forthat group of schools is fucking UCLA with only 72 PERCENT. what percentage of jobs within this 72% are big law jobs that are enough to pay back these kids 200K+ in loans? I guarantee you its less than half.. and the funny thing is it's only going to get WORSE. its a big joke how bad employment is for the rest these schools. these students mortgage their whole lives on these predatory loans while the law school professors/administrators laugh their way to the bank. it's like great white sharks preying on the little sea lions. a high number of these kids at these schools that will have 200k+ in loans will NEVER be able to buy a house or whatever else because of being debt-ridden their whole adult lives.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/?r=ca

UCLA: 72%
USC: 69%
UC Davis: 60%
Pepperdine: 45%
UC Hastings: 46%

i have no intention of staying on the titanic that is the legal market in california.

LOLZ good grief you sound like a drama queen.

http://www.lstscorereports.com/state/CA/

[ManoftheHour]

Last year, many criticized me for being too negative against California law schools. They couldn't fathom this swift decline in rankings and prestige. "But UCLA is a good school! And UC Irvine will break into the T14 - Dean Chemerinsky promised," they would say.

My goal wasn't to annoy or spam this board. I was trying to give insight into the California market — one that I know personally, with insider connections among various CA law schools. But, alas, the calamity facing CA law schools has reached public knowledge. And I am pleased TLS has finally accepted CA's decline in higher-education. I don't think they will weather this storm; I see further declines in the future.

So far, my job here is done. I will return when TLS needs me back.

Dre. is 180.

[Nova]

t14 or bust for CA

USC/UCLA with $$$ trolling

[n1o2c3a4c5h6e7t]

UC Irvine grads created some additional competition in the market. Not sure if the small class graduating in 2012 would have much effect on the employment numbers for other schools, but it is certainly something to look for in the future.

I think it's all the t-14 people who flood the california market while only stanford and boalt are the one that have serious options outside california. Not to mention the state is broke, you are looking at the detroit if you take away the high tech /entertianment sectors jobs.

An insanely hyperbolic statement of which little is based on fact. While California has since dropped from it's lofty perch of 7th largest economy in the world, 12th ain't bad with a GSP of ~2 trillion. Our unemployment rate my be at 8.5%, Detroit's is at least twice that. California's budget is BALANCED, Detroit filed Chapter 9. Aside from producing entertainment and tech, California continues to be a global agricultural producer. It's even beginning to see an uptick in heavy manufacturing. Finally, the real estate market has all but stabilized and the Chase-Schiller index looks promising.

California's budget is not balanced at all, or even close, if you look at their unfunded liabilities. If what you say were correct, the municipal spread on California bonds relative to most other states wouldn't be so extreme.

Will it go the way of Detroit? Let's hope not for the sake of the world economy, but investing in California has been relatively risky for years, even post-recovery.

[zman]

California is NOT the 7th richest whatever in anything real.. You can't look asset prices in terms of speculative activity in the high tech sector(another bubble same as the 90s) or real estate.. Other than agriculture and shrinking entertainment industry it does not have much. As the previous poster points out the undfunded liabilities are HUGE and the it is probably the expensive state to live in and it's to most taxed state. I mean it's not like the rest of the country is any better but california is not all it's cracked out to be.

[BigZuck]

California is NOT the 7th richest whatever in anything real.. You can't look asset prices in terms of speculative activity in the high tech sector(another bubble same as the 90s) or real estate.. Other than agriculture and shrinking entertainment industry it does not have much. As the previous poster points out the undfunded liabilities are HUGE and the it is probably the expensive state to live in and it's to most taxed state. I mean it's not like the rest of the country is any better but california is not all it's cracked out to be.

Clearly you've never driven on the Pacific Coast Highway.

I'm down with cheap coast of living, don't get me wrong. But there's tradeoffs.

[n1o2c3a4c5h6e7t]

California is NOT the 7th richest whatever in anything real.. You can't look asset prices in terms of speculative activity in the high tech sector(another bubble same as the 90s) or real estate.. Other than agriculture and shrinking entertainment industry it does not have much. As the previous poster points out the undfunded liabilities are HUGE and the it is probably the expensive state to live in and it's to most taxed state. I mean it's not like the rest of the country is any better but california is not all it's cracked out to be.

Clearly you've never driven on the Pacific Coast Highway.

I'm down with cheap coast of living, don't get me wrong. But there's tradeoffs.

Buy an enormous house in a low-tax state and a Ferrari to drive on the nice highways of high-tax states with the money you save. Or did I just destroy your tradeoff argument?!?

[DportIA]

California is NOT the 7th richest whatever in anything real.. You can't look asset prices in terms of speculative activity in the high tech sector(another bubble same as the 90s) or real estate.. Other than agriculture and shrinking entertainment industry it does not have much. As the previous poster points out the undfunded liabilities are HUGE and the it is probably the expensive state to live in and it's to most taxed state. I mean it's not like the rest of the country is any better but california is not all it's cracked out to be.

Clearly you've never driven on the Pacific Coast Highway.
.

Ahhhhhh...

[ManoftheHour]

To each his own. Rather have an average house here than a bigger one elsewhere. I love the Midwest and the east, but long term (way down the line) I couldn't imagine myself anywhere else. Of course, I grew up here so I'm totally biased. Too used to the lifestyle.

[redbull12]

http://www.sfgate.com/education/article ... 443604.php



"Path to law school opens from community colleges"

MP of article: Six law schools (UC Davis, UC Irvine, University of San Francisco, Santa Clara University, Loyola, USC) are now partnering with 24 California Community Colleges to potentially expose the legal field and potential legal careers to lower-income students (who typically compose California community colleges) through various counseling/networking/tutoring programs and even potentially waiving the very expensive law school application fee.

I wonder if law school transparency will be discussed.

Maybe next year a program can be developed with California high schools.

[MCL Law Dean]

http://www.sfgate.com/education/article ... 443604.php



"Path to law school opens from community colleges"

MP of article: Six law schools (UC Davis, UC Irvine, University of San Francisco, Santa Clara University, Loyola, USC) are now partnering with 24 California Community Colleges to potentially expose the legal field and potential legal careers to lower-income students (who typically compose California community colleges) through various counseling/networking/tutoring programs and even potentially waiving the very expensive law school application fee.

I wonder if law school transparency will be discussed.

Maybe next year a program can be developed with California high schools.

This is a project of the "Access and Fairness Commission" of the State Bar of California. On one hand it appears to open up an interesting path to law school. Two inexpensive years at community college (at very, very low cost) for the GE classes, followed by a guaranteed articulation agreement for access to a UC or CSU (assuming high GPA), and then a shot at law school, again assuming an adequate UGPA and LSAT.

So what is different other than an inexpensive first two years? The point is that counseling and pre-law, LSAT, and financial advising would start at the very beginning of the journey. Although this is certainly a benefit to many first-generation college/law students . . . the missing link as far as I can see is that it is silent as to how these students will ultimately finance law school unless they fall in the unique GPA/LSAT category that gains access with large scholarships . . . and even then TLSers will pounce on the T14 vs TTT scholarship issue.

A well meaning, but not particularly completely thought out program IMHO. Risks being window dressing for what could otherwise be a meaningful dialogue about broader access to legal education.

[Jchance]

More like this program exists to groom these kids to go to those law schools to combat the falling law school apps. Even if they attend, most of these kids will end up not practicing law anyways.

Just another marketing strategy for CA schools with a failing CA legal economy to support it.

[redbull12]

More like this program exists to groom these kids to go to those law schools to combat the falling law school apps. Even if they attend, most of these kids will end up not practicing law anyways.

Just another marketing strategy for CA schools with a failing CA legal economy to support it.

@ california legal economy

[bizzike]

budget is BALANCED

The number of accounting tricks Jerry Brown used to conjure this ruse would have made Enron blush.