Top Law Schools

According to mylsn, there's a good chance I'll be waitlisted by UCLA, but no chance at USC. When looking further into it, it seems like very few get waitlisted by USC, or at least that UCLA is much more lenient in who they accept on their waitlist. I just find this odd considering UCLA has higher medians than USC, yet throws the type of people on their waitlist that USC would flat-out reject. Is this common knowledge or is this even true? It's not like UCLA gains anything from waitlisting a ton of applicants while their peer school doesn't, right? I'm just trying to figure out which one to apply to as a total reach school.

UCLA takes a larger class than USC, so they have a need for a larger waitlist.
Also, I'd assume UCLA loses a lot of applicants to T-14 schools, whereas USC loses less to T-14 and only some to UCLA.

Fiddlesticks wrote:UCLA takes a larger class than USC, so they have a need for a larger waitlist.
Also, I'd assume UCLA loses a lot of applicants to T-14 schools, whereas USC loses less to T-14 and only some to UCLA.

That actually makes perfect sense, thanks. It is pretty dumb UCLA loses more to the T-14 because USC and UCLA are virtually identical as schools and really should be tied in the rankings (just as BC and BU should be tied with one another). Oh well.

FredTheFish wrote:

Fiddlesticks wrote:UCLA takes a larger class than USC, so they have a need for a larger waitlist.
Also, I'd assume UCLA loses a lot of applicants to T-14 schools, whereas USC loses less to T-14 and only some to UCLA.

That actually makes perfect sense, thanks. It is pretty dumb UCLA loses more to the T-14 because USC and UCLA are virtually identical as schools and really should be tied in the rankings (just as BC and BU should be tied with one another). Oh well.

One is ranked #16, the other is ranked #20, so on a larger scale they are virtually the same (both top 20 yet not t-14). I personally think it should be the other way around because USC has a better alumni network, better career center support, and a slightly higher % of grads getting into big law (USC 33% vs UCLA 30%). I'd say the gap between BC and BU is much tighter than the one between these two LA schools.

.

They're also slightly different schools in terms of the student body and those students' goals. People on here scoff at the idea, but UCLA clearly has more of a PI focus than USC, and that may be underlying the numbers (presumably a smaller percentage of kids do OCI—same thing happens at GULC, Berkeley, and NYU). They're certainly similar in terms of placement, but all else being equal, I'd probably go UCLA over USC (I was deciding between these two... then chose something else, but that happened later). USC plays up the Trojan network, but it's really more of an undergrad thing that doesn't seem to mean much for legal hiring. They're both good schools, though, and either is a defensible choice with the right scholarship.