- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Free
Admissions profile
Discussions
To be honest, I never believed that UCI would debut in top 20. I was expecting mid 30's and coming in at #30 is very respectable. However, I am highly doubtful they will rank better than 22-25 in the future. We must remember that UCI has a much smaller class than all other law schools, and the way they recruited those students was through heavy scholarships. The job market in California, the main hub for the students for UCI graduates is not the greatest. Pair that with the fact that the greater Los Angeles/Orange County area employs graduates from UCLA and USC and in some cases Loyola and Pepperdine grads have the upper hand thanks to alumni networks. So, once they have a full class, their employment score will most likely suffer, so will LSAT/GPA ratio. But the future will tell.
@jgoodwin765....I asked myself the same question this morning and filled out the application hahaha. So, we'll see what happens. Gotta love the Cali competition: UCLA #16 vs USC #20; Irvine #30 vs Davis #31; Pepperdine 52 vs. Hastings #59.
So, the rankings for 2015-2016 came out today. California schools seem to be doing much better probably given the improving employment prospects, a huge consideration for US News Ranking. Also, kudos to UC Irvine for ranking so high given that this was their first time being ranked. Here's how Cali schools ranked.
Stanford 2(tie (+1))
Berkeley 8(tie (+1)) - Applied
UCLA 16 (-)
USC 20(-) - Applied
Irvine 30 (NR) - Applied
Davis 31(+5)
Pepperdine 52 (+2) - Applied
Hastings 59 (-5) - Applied
Loyola 75 (+12) - Applied.
Same here. I think my strongest points has become logic (embedded conditions, contrapositives) and etc....if any of you have questions on that stuff, feel free to tag me.
Thanks everyone. The hope is alive for my dream school Berkeley! Best of luck everyone!!
Thanks @mariesutton291 and @nielsinha488 S. Best of luck to all of you guys!!
I'd say if you don't get an e-mail by 6:30 pm, just expect the scores tomorrow...hopefully.
@jeffersonjustina496 - My thoughts exactly! If Kaplan had insiders at lsac they wouldn't be Kaplan
So, apparently, Kaplan sent out an e-mail to their students saying that their "insiders" at lsac have notified them that the scores will be out on Friday. So, Friday comes and goes and Kaplan students start freaking out and then they get an e-mail from Kaplan that it's getting delayed. Anyway, not sure how true this whole story is but I read it on Reddit.
Btw...did anyone hear about how Kaplan shot themselves on the foot? ( a little bit of gossip session while we wait)
Grey is also the color of my pants and tie today. Mere coincidence.
I have so much work....I've been refreshing my gmail and lsac account every 2 minutes. This is nightmare. @wraith985-4026 Wang - We've been scarred for life hahaha
@nielsinha488 S - Yep, my account has expired, but here I am - I really need to get a life. Maybe after I get my score. We'll see hahahaha
I think there is an alternative solution to this issue. Although, it is fair to give longer time to test takers who have disabilities (ones that provide legitimate evidence that the test taker is at a disadvantage compared to other test takers), the issue then becomes, well how do you precisely determine how much longer time would make up for that individual's disability. For example, test taker A has ADD and has a doctor's note specifying the details of his condition - how on earth could LSAC make a determination how much longer to grant that individual so that the individual doesn't suffer or get an advantage over other test takers? In my opinion, this is a relevant factor since if the individual gets an advantage over other students due to longer than needed time, then the "normal" test takers will suffer (the word normal shall mean test takers in normal testing condition). I think a solution would be to allows those students take the test, but not use their score as part of the curve. Instead just give them their score based on other test takers' statistics. I also think that LSAC should encourage law schools to take into consideration the factor that test takers for whom English is not their first language, are at a disadvantage. LSAC keeps dodging this issue, but it's clear that test takers who are not native English speakers are at a disadvantage. I for one, can testify to that. And to answer the initial question, no LSAC should not disclose to Law Schools that students who took the test had disabilities - in fact they got sued for doing this and had to pay up I think close to 7 million dollars.
@mariesutton291 - I've spoken with many law school graduates and they almost all say the same thing: it is always preferable to go to the highest ranking school vs lower ranking with scholarship. This of course applies to upper 1st tier schools. So, let's say you get sticker price offer from Georgetown #14 and you get a 30K yearly offer from Hastings, Georgetown is the better option for you, mainly because of job prospects and the fact that a lot of students lose their scholarship. The other day I was looking at Loyola, and 49% of their entering class had lost their scholarship for 2L.