In at UC Irvine Forum

[jdub]

OMG, I can't tell you how amazing I thought ASD was. I was totally on the fence before, and wasn't expecting ASD to change things in my mind, but it really did. I was blown away. I don't really have anything to add onto whats already been said.

The business/legal community that came out in support was probably the biggest clincher for me... two that I talked to in detail (both from national firms) were bubbling over with excitement and mentioned multiple times how it isn't fair they don't have a top law school in OC, and how for such a strong local economy its ridiculous that they are forced to drive up to USC and UCLA for grads.

There were also just-graduated attorneys there from other law schools (our surrogate 2Ls and 3Ls) who couldn't stop telling us how excited they were for us and how we were making the right decision.

There's been a lot of talk about how UCI will be a risk, but after ASD, I feel that going anywhere else would be a bigger one, to be honest.

[ChipJan]

.

[Veritas]

the letters start going out today right? i think i am going to be sick.

Anyone else know this for sure?

Is it fair to say that 100% of these letters will be rejections considering all acceptances were over the phone and waitlist letters went out 2 weeks ago?

mmm there could be a good mix of WLs and rejections. I think they waited till after the ASD to get a better idea of student interest.

Or, maybe this is me just hoping to get a WL.

[ak2ca]

Just wanted to add a quick comment about the ASD -- I thought it was great! The enthusiasm of the faculty, administration and OC legal community was so wonderful to hear after all the skepticism and fear that many of us have been feeling "in this economy." I feel totally energized and excited to start in the fall. The curriculum is very practical and hands-on, and the small taste of the instruction that we all participated in was fantastic. Finally, there is also a great sense of camaraderie among the students.

I didn't hear anyone speaking about when WL and/or rejection letters would start to go out. I would guess that they may hold off on sending out the majority of notices until after the 4/15 deadline -- but maybe some of the other attendees got different news?

Good luck to everyone still waiting!

[pany1985]

ASD sounds like it was pretty awesome. I couldn't go myself because of a prior commitement (plus being 3000 miles away) but I did go visit the campus about two months ago and I felt similarly after talking to Dean Ortiz. I feel like there is a danger of being overly optimistic and seeing the good things about the school while willfully ignoring the bad... but I think and certainly hope I'll be making the right choice by shipping off to UCI.

[gyita]

There's been a lot of talk about how UCI will be a risk, but after ASD, I feel that going anywhere else would be a bigger one, to be honest.

What risks do you see as lower at UCI?

[LawApp2012]

There's been a lot of talk about how UCI will be a risk, but after ASD, I feel that going anywhere else would be a bigger one, to be honest.

What risks do you see as lower at UCI?

I know this question wasn't addressed to me, but I feel like if I didn't go to UCI, I would regret the decision forever. That would be the greatest risk for me. One of the judges who visited us from the OC Superior Court said that she wishes she could go to law school all over again just to be part of this experience and to be taught by Chemerinsky. Of course she was half-joking, but I really feel like going anywhere else wouldn't give me the same experience, opportunities, or memories that I will get from UCI.

[ak2ca]

The question was also not addressed to me, but I know many prospective students had to weigh the pros and cons before making their decisions whether or not to attend UCI. The four major areas I was worried about when I thought about matriculating were: the kinds of internship and job opportunities I could expect, the quality of the faculty, whether I would be able to participate in law review and/or moot court, and whether I would be well prepared to pass the CA bar.

After asking questions of the administration, researching the incoming faculty, and experiencing first-hand the commitment of the staff and local legal community, I am confident that the risk will be worth the reward. I believe students at UCI will have better internship and job opportunities in this hyper-competitive market than their peers at other SoCal law schools due to the eagerness of the OC community to assist in this effort. The faculty is a group of highly talented individuals who are committed to the dean's vision for the new institution. Plus, the low student-faculty ratio will enable students to receive a personalized legal education that ensures they know the law and how to put it into practice. As a start-up, the school will also provide students with ample opportunities to develop a law review and moot court. I was assured that the administration has made contacts with lawyers and recently graduates of high caliber schools who have experience developing these programs and who are eager to help UCI students to do the same. While this seems like a lot of work, I love the idea of helping lay the groundwork for programs like these. Lastly, since UCI is making a hard push to debut high in the rankings and to get their ABA approval quickly, I think they will work hard to ensure that their first classes of students have a high bar passage rate.

These were my personal concerns. Any others you are worried about that I could maybe provide some feedback on?

[gyita]

Thanks to LawApp2010 and to ak2ca for the input.

I am one of the nearly 2600 that are waiting for my UCI rejection letter to arrive in the mail. UCI was the only school to which I applied this cycle (applied late, and UCI was the only interesting school that would accept a Feb LSAT). So now I am thinking about next cycle. Would UCI be a better choice than, say, Hastings, in the absence of the full-ride scholarship?

UCI still looks very good to me, as my purpose in attending law school is to forge a career in public interest law. UCI is the only school in the West that is focused on public interest; others merely have a program that addresses the interest of a minority of students. I'll be applying for FY10.

With the free tuition, the risks of a start-up school with UCI's faculty, leadership, and profile are mitigated and then some, IMHO. However, I am asking myself whether or not I would be willing to pay the same amount for the UCI experience as I would for, say, the Hastings experience. Hastings is very different - big, established - a real machine for churning out lawyers. But it is also so close to the 9th Circuit and so many other clerking and "real life practice" opportunities. UCI has promise; Hastings and other schools have track records.

I am confident that the inaugural class will be top-notch. The full-tuition offer did the trick - it encouraged many students to give Irvine more thought than they might have otherwise and gave the admissions committee a fantastic slate. But I do wonder what caliber of applications next year will bring, once the full-tuition offer disappears. A school is made by both its faculty and its students - what will UCI do to keep drawing the same extent of interest in the absence of rankings data?

Thoughts? Perhaps some of these issues were addressed at ASD?

[LawApp2012]

Thanks to LawApp2010 and to ak2ca for the input.

I am one of the nearly 2600 that are waiting for my UCI rejection letter to arrive in the mail. UCI was the only school to which I applied this cycle (applied late, and UCI was the only interesting school that would accept a Feb LSAT). So now I am thinking about next cycle. Would UCI be a better choice than, say, Hastings, in the absence of the full-ride scholarship?

UCI still looks very good to me, as my purpose in attending law school is to forge a career in public interest law. UCI is the only school in the West that is focused on public interest; others merely have a program that addresses the interest of a minority of students. I'll be applying for FY10.

With the free tuition, the risks of a start-up school with UCI's faculty, leadership, and profile are mitigated and then some, IMHO. However, I am asking myself whether or not I would be willing to pay the same amount for the UCI experience as I would for, say, the Hastings experience. Hastings is very different - big, established - a real machine for churning out lawyers. But it is also so close to the 9th Circuit and so many other clerking and "real life practice" opportunities. UCI has promise; Hastings and other schools have track records.

I am confident that the inaugural class will be top-notch. The full-tuition offer did the trick - it encouraged many students to give Irvine more thought than they might have otherwise and gave the admissions committee a fantastic slate. But I do wonder what caliber of applications next year will bring, once the full-tuition offer disappears. A school is made by both its faculty and its students - what will UCI do to keep drawing the same extent of interest in the absence of rankings data?

Thoughts? Perhaps some of these issues were addressed at ASD?

I don't think it was addressed or asked during the ASD, but I think there's a good chance they will be offering scholarship money to at least some students in the second class. This is something I used to think about too, but after the ASD and everything I saw and heard, I now don't think they'll have any problem attracting future students even with less or no scholarship money. There will always be skeptics who think no one will choose a new school over an offer from a high-ranked, well-established school, but UCI has proven them wrong this year and I think they will continue to prove them wrong.

[jacktripper]

Thanks to LawApp2010 and to ak2ca for the input.

I am one of the nearly 2600 that are waiting for my UCI rejection letter to arrive in the mail. UCI was the only school to which I applied this cycle (applied late, and UCI was the only interesting school that would accept a Feb LSAT). So now I am thinking about next cycle. Would UCI be a better choice than, say, Hastings, in the absence of the full-ride scholarship?

UCI still looks very good to me, as my purpose in attending law school is to forge a career in public interest law. UCI is the only school in the West that is focused on public interest; others merely have a program that addresses the interest of a minority of students. I'll be applying for FY10.

With the free tuition, the risks of a start-up school with UCI's faculty, leadership, and profile are mitigated and then some, IMHO. However, I am asking myself whether or not I would be willing to pay the same amount for the UCI experience as I would for, say, the Hastings experience. Hastings is very different - big, established - a real machine for churning out lawyers. But it is also so close to the 9th Circuit and so many other clerking and "real life practice" opportunities. UCI has promise; Hastings and other schools have track records.

I am confident that the inaugural class will be top-notch. The full-tuition offer did the trick - it encouraged many students to give Irvine more thought than they might have otherwise and gave the admissions committee a fantastic slate. But I do wonder what caliber of applications next year will bring, once the full-tuition offer disappears. A school is made by both its faculty and its students - what will UCI do to keep drawing the same extent of interest in the absence of rankings data?

Thoughts? Perhaps some of these issues were addressed at ASD?

I don't think it was addressed or asked during the ASD, but I think there's a good chance they will be offering scholarship money to at least some students in the second class. This is something I used to think about too, but after the ASD and everything I saw and heard, I now don't think they'll have any problem attracting future students even with less or no scholarship money. There will always be skeptics who think no one will choose a new school over an offer from a high-ranked, well-established school, but UCI has proven them wrong this year and I think they will continue to prove them wrong.

This was mainly due to the free tuition. Do you think people will be as torn between UCI and Hastings/Davis in the next few years without the free tution? I really doubt it. In my opinion the amount of interest in UCI will drop off greatly without the free tuition and the lack of reputation that comes with being in a market for 40 or 100 years. I'm not saying they don't have a lot of things going for them. They definitely have a strong faculty, but a majority of the interest came out of the free tuition.

[pany1985]

I think people will be torn if they like SoCal and don't want to compete with Berkeley and Stanford for local jobs

[uwdoalt]

Perhaps the bigger issue is also that they will need to start filling larger classes soon. It is one thing to fill 60 seats, another 200. But, then, they obviously had no trouble this year. It's hard to say, but I'd still say UCI is in pretty good shape overall.

[jacktripper]

I think people will be torn if they like SoCal and don't want to compete with Berkeley and Stanford for local jobs

I agree. I'm guessing most of the applicants in the next few years will be people that have some connection with SoCal/Orange County. People that love the area or have other personal reasons for living there in the future will probably be the majority of applicants. I'm wondering if this means that their applicant pool won't be as strong. UCI will probably keep the class size small considering they are still starting out so the numbers probably won't drop off so much.

[LawApp2012]

but UCI has proven them wrong this year and I think they will continue to prove them wrong.

This was mainly due to the free tuition. Do you think people will be as torn between UCI and Hastings/Davis in the next few years without the free tution? I really doubt it. In my opinion the amount of interest in UCI will drop off greatly without the free tuition and the lack of reputation that comes with being in a market for 40 or 100 years. I'm not saying they don't have a lot of things going for them. They definitely have a strong faculty, but a majority of the interest came out of the free tuition.

For me it wasn't about the free tuition, but you're right that many other people may have chosen another school without it. I'm not sure how many people they want to admit for the second year class, but I think they will be able to find at least 60 people just like me. That's my prediction, but only time will tell.

[jacktripper]

Perhaps the bigger issue is also that they will need to start filling larger classes soon. It is one thing to fill 60 seats, another 200. But, then, they obviously had no trouble this year. It's hard to say, but I'd still say UCI is in pretty good shape overall.

Yeah, the UC system is really strong. I see them being on par with Davis and Hastings in the future, but it is hard to say when that will be exactly.

[pany1985]

Especially considering it's the only UC south of L.A., while Hastings and Davis are in essentially the same area and have to compete with each other for students

[alleycat13]

Does anyone know how UCI plans on dealing with or if they even plan on applying the usual (dreaded) 1st year curve? What will the grading system look like? (A,B,C, etc., or High Pass, Pass, etc.,)

Also, does anyone know if they will be admitting an additional amount of first year students in order to account for the usual 1st year drop off? By "drop off" I mean, those that 1) decide law school/the legal profession is not for them; 2) (may) transfer out after first year; and/or 3) are faced with unforeseen personal circumstances that prevent continuing in the program., etc......

How about transferring in to the second year class next year? Possibility? Scholarships offered then? Sorry about all the questions......Just considering all the possibilities to reflect the increasing remoteness of acceptance into the Fall 2009 entering class.

[NoamChomsky]

Does anyone know how UCI plans on dealing with or if they even plan on applying the usual (dreaded) 1st year curve? What will the grading system look like? (A,B,C, etc., or High Pass, Pass, etc.,)

Also, does anyone know if they will be admitting an additional amount of first year students in order to account for the usual 1st year drop off? By "drop off" I mean, those that 1) decide law school/the legal profession is not for them; 2) (may) transfer out after first year; and/or 3) are faced with unforeseen personal circumstances that prevent continuing in the program., etc......

How about transferring in to the second year class next year? Possibility? Scholarships offered then? Sorry about all the questions......Just considering all the possibilities to reflect the increasing remoteness of acceptance into the Fall 2009 entering class.

Considering that all ABA accredited schools do not take transfers from non ABA accredited schools no one should count on transferring out of UC Irvine. If you are attending, know that you're in it for the long run.

[pany1985]

Dean Ortiz said that she'd personally prefer a system like Boalt's (which makes sense given that it's where she's coming from" but that to make things simpler and more accessible to employers, they're going to use standard letter grades. I asked about the curve but as of late February there was no answer, except that obviously it's not going to be a "20% of the class gets an F"-style scam. They don't anticipate any students failing to maintain "good academic standing" (which would of course mean losing the scholly). If anyone else has a more specific answer, I'd be interested in the details.

[alleycat13]

Does anyone know how UCI plans on dealing with or if they even plan on applying the usual (dreaded) 1st year curve? What will the grading system look like? (A,B,C, etc., or High Pass, Pass, etc.,)

Also, does anyone know if they will be admitting an additional amount of first year students in order to account for the usual 1st year drop off? By "drop off" I mean, those that 1) decide law school/the legal profession is not for them; 2) (may) transfer out after first year; and/or 3) are faced with unforeseen personal circumstances that prevent continuing in the program., etc......

How about transferring in to the second year class next year? Possibility? Scholarships offered then? Sorry about all the questions......Just considering all the possibilities to reflect the increasing remoteness of acceptance into the Fall 2009 entering class.

Considering that all ABA accredited schools do not take transfers from non ABA accredited schools no one should count on transferring out of UC Irvine. If you are attending, know that you're in it for the long run.

If UCI has provisional by 2010, it's essentially the same as accredited, meaning you can transfer, although I'm not certain how other schools would handle an entirely off-beat curriculum (if indeed it will be). It seems rather remote to me that UCI would not gain provisional by this time as the ABA appears to be in UCI's corner, and has done plenty of PR for the school thus far.

The long run may be a bit of an over statement.....

[NoamChomsky]

Does anyone know how UCI plans on dealing with or if they even plan on applying the usual (dreaded) 1st year curve? What will the grading system look like? (A,B,C, etc., or High Pass, Pass, etc.,)

Also, does anyone know if they will be admitting an additional amount of first year students in order to account for the usual 1st year drop off? By "drop off" I mean, those that 1) decide law school/the legal profession is not for them; 2) (may) transfer out after first year; and/or 3) are faced with unforeseen personal circumstances that prevent continuing in the program., etc......

How about transferring in to the second year class next year? Possibility? Scholarships offered then? Sorry about all the questions......Just considering all the possibilities to reflect the increasing remoteness of acceptance into the Fall 2009 entering class.

Considering that all ABA accredited schools do not take transfers from non ABA accredited schools no one should count on transferring out of UC Irvine. If you are attending, know that you're in it for the long run.

If UCI has provisional by 2010, it's essentially the same as accredited, meaning you can transfer, although I'm not certain how other schools would handle an entirely off-beat curriculum (if indeed it will be). It seems rather remote to me that UCI would not gain provisional by this time as the ABA appears to be in UCI's corner, and has done plenty of PR for the school thus far.

The long run may be a bit of an over statement.....

UCI will most certainly be provisional by 2010... however I am even more certain that by the time transfer applications are due the school will have not even applied for such accreditation (a school must be in its 2nd year of operation in order to apply to the ABA). If you put yourself in a students time line you will realize that the first years batch will not have a chance to split if they don't like the school.

[pany1985]

It's hard to imagine anyone wanting to bail on a full scholarship though, even if the option was there

[uwdoalt]

Probably no time to transfer. Not sure if schools can make an exception to the rule (is this mandated by ABA or just a general policy?). If so, then UCI would be the one school to make an exception for. But, you would presumably give up the scholarship. It would be nice to have the option of visiting in 3rd year, since by then you might well be a little sick of Irvine, but presumably you'd have to pay. Would be cool if they worked out some kind of exchange deal with Hastings or something.

[pany1985]

They are supposedly gonna be participating in the UCDC program, so at least some people will be able to head to the east coast for part of school

http://www.law.ucla.edu/home/News/Detai ... ordid=2038