Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.2K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 11 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 2 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 580 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
Related Discussions
Got my decisions back (mostly)...stuck now.
BirdLaw818
Free Trial Member
Hello,
so I have a 3.28 and a 169...
USC rejected, UCLA waitlisted, and UC Irvine accepted with 90k, Loyola with 110k.
If UCLA rejects, I'm left with Uc Irvine as it is higher ranked than loyola...
Given I can make good grades and work hard (yada yada)...am I in a bad spot?
I dont have solid career goals right now but I know for sure that I dont want to graduate with 100k in debt with a 60k a year job IF that...
how likely is it that I go to UCI and crap out? Ive already waited a year and increased my LSAT by 10 points to get to where I am now and was extremely disappointed USC and UCLA didnt accept/waitlisted.
Thanks all
Comments
Good work! Maybe send ULCA an LOCI and find out more about Irvine.
To clarify, are you basically asking if UCI is a good school to go to? Like, what are your job prospects?
If that's the question, I think UCI will serve you well. Yes, it's a new school. But it already has a very good reputation. Their employment and bar passage statistics are all great. I kinda feel like people who go there now in these early years are getting a bargain, I think it'll continue climbing the ranks.
You should definitely send UCLA a LOCI if you haven't already. The only other option I suppose would be to push back again, keep studying and re-take the LSAT and see if you can crack 170. Splitter cycles are just always really unpredictable. I saw that Spivey said though that he suspects next year's cycle will be less competitive than the current one, so if that's true it could also be in your favor.
Are these the only schools you applied to?
I don't think those are unreasonable results especially if you make it into UCLA. However, they may be results where you are just outside the range you need to avoid stress by getting an even better scholarship or snatching the job security available in the Top 14.
Did you apply anywhere else?
I would either retake or try to negotiate. If you decide to try to negotiate, I would recommend tossing an app to WUSTL first since they are usually generous with money and that could help you get leverage over UCI.
http://mylsn.info/jwna1q/
Are you pretty set on staying in CA?
Thanks guys,
Yeah I'm set on CA. I'm sending WUSTL an app today and hopefully will negotiate Irvine. It just sucks thinking that there's a worthy chance UCLA might accept me off waitlist but that it could be super late. I wish I could put it off again and sit another cycle but I'm honestly not in a place where I can do that...I figure if I do end up with Irvine then I'll have to power it out to make it but if you talk to anyone on TLS forums They'd love to have you believe that you won't be anywhere but the bottom rankings.
Yeah, that's where I just don't agree with TLS. There are tons of people that have good careers and went to non-T14 law schools. It does depend on your goals though. Are you wanting biglaw or anything specific? And if you are set on staying in CA, and especially Southern CA, then that really works in your favor.
Just the other day I asked someone that's a very successful attorney in LA what her opinion was on UCI. She only had positive things to say, that it's a very good school with a great reputation. (And for the record, she is a Southwestern grad who is now high up within a major entertainment company. The ranking of a law school does not always determine your fate.)
Usually, it is best to bet on ending up at median not because you couldn't do better, but because it is hard to know how you will do against a whole bunch of motivated highly intelligent people. That's why you want to either maximize your scholarship or get into a school with a very good LRAP(at least the top 14). If you don't want/get big law it is usually a pretty big drop in salary. But if you get that big scholarship which you have a pretty good start on, it doesn't matter so much if you don't get big law because at least you don't need the big law salary as much to get out of debt.
I'm sending wustl an application to see what they say and if they give a big enough scholly then I can hopefully negotiate Irvine or better yet get off the waitlist at ucla. But I want to play it safe and not get my hopes up haha. 90k isn't terrible I guess...i would love to work towards big law and make 200 grand a year and while mor money is always better, I wouldn't complain if I started off somewhat lower on the tax bracket either
Loyola is pretty great. Have you visited the campus. I actually think it’s the best atmosphere of all the la schools. Also you will be a big fish there and go for super cheap. UCI had such a terrible energy. Felt like everyone there didn’t want to be there. Just email UCLA periodically about your interest. That is still in play. But again check out Loyola. It’s solid. And if you crush it there you can get most jobs. All is well!
Interesting. Why do you think they think next year will be less competitive? I guess I had been fearing that each successive year would be more and more competitive now that LSAT takers and applications had started rebounding after their nadir, and the "Trump bump" (and throw in GRE applicants)
You should be extremely proud of your LSAT score as well as the fact that you've been accepted to a T-30 school (UCI), with scholarship money nonetheless!
I am also very adamant about attending 1 of these 4 California schools (along with Pepperdine), but we are in quite different positions. I have a 3.7 GPA, but I will be lucky to even break a 155 on the LSAT that I will be taking next weekend. I would be absolutely ecstatic if I were to even be waitlisted by UCLA or USC, you should be too!
I'm not sure of the reasons, but Mike Spivey (super respected admissions consultant) is thinking apps will be down:
Yeah, I'd echo what Leah said about going to a non-T14 and still having a great career. Law firms will care more about what you've done while in law school to prepare you for their firm as well as your performance in school. I read a lot of articles on the ABA website and Above the Law, etc. and they also say that the only difference between a T14 and a non-T14 is really the name. Sometimes you may have to reach out to firms you want to work for by not going to a T14 school but that doesn't mean you couldn't end up at a BigLaw firm. Don't put so much importance on the rank because ranks do vary. UC Irvine is still a great school and yes, it's good that you've been waitlisted at UCLA but keep in mine that waitlist could keep you there all summer. Some get in off those waitlist but some don't. If anything, like Leah and another 7sager has advised, write a LOCI so that they know that you're still interested in attending. However, be prepared to accept UC Irvine's offer because if it comes down to it you could transfer if you really wanted to. I just don't want you to pass on the other offers you got, in the hopes that you'll get into UCLA. The others gave you scholarships and saving money in your first year wouldn't hurt. If you come off the waitlist you might not get the scholarship money if that's important to your decision to attend.
I want to both agree and disagree with this post.
By all accounts there is no significant difference betwwen the education you will recieve at a Top 14 and the education you will recieve at a non-top 14. Additionally, the level of competition will be close enough to the same that you can't expect it to alter your grades. Consequently, the UCI people or Loyola people are not going to be easier than UCLA people to compete against. That's why the conventional advice is to assume you will get median grades at whatever law school you attend. This is why you can't plan on transferring.
As to what firms care about, they unfortunately do by all accounts care about the name of your law school as much as how well you do there. You can look at employment numbers and see that big firms hire more people with much less impressive grades/class rank inside or close to the top 14 than outside it.
Be prepared to accept Irvine,s offer because it is a lot of money and you won't have to count on big law as much. But, should you get into UCLA, there will be a difficult choice to make. Do you accept UCLA with huge debt and a better chance at a high pay check or Irvine with less debt and a lower chance of the high pay check? It's a relatively good problem to have compared to people who don't have offers that good.
So they were up this year but they think they're going to decrease next cycle? What do people think about this?
Explanations for why they are up and whether they still hold next year:
Trump Effect: An active judiciary has been visibly seen resisting Trump which causes Trump opponents to want to go into law to do the same and Trump supporters to want to go into law to stem the tide.
Should still be in play, but could be slightly diminished. The novelty may wear off eventually, but Trump will still be in office and there will be major law suits around his legislation and executive orders.
GRE effect and LSAC changes in response:
This one explains itself. Wehave mkre testing dates for the LSAT and another test that can get people into law school.
Still in effect, probably greater.
Potential economic response:
People go to law school to escape an economy where people can't find satisfactory jobs out of college. From unemployment numbers this seems unlikely, but grad student attendance is a leading indicator of recession and we are bound to have one eventually.
Still in play next time, but bigger. If a recession is starting, its quarters of discouraging job losses are still to come. They certainly are not happening right now.
Economy of law:
Maybe there are increased legal jobs or something.
I don't even think this one is true today let alone in the future.