<p>for someone who works on the west coast (and isnt a yale/harvard/stanford guy), would they be better off going to law schools with more prestige (as in ranked higher), such as michigan, penn, duke, etc. or by going to a school in the west coast, such as berkeley?</p>
<p>what about the same scenario, but the west coast option is UCLA?</p>
<p>and same scenario, but the west coast option is USC?</p>
<p>finally, for the same person who prefers to work on the west coast but may potentially want to work on the global stage and maybe in asia, which school would serve his/her needs more: michigan, penn, virginia, duke, northwestern, cornell, berkeley, georgetown, ucla, usc?</p>
<p>With similar interests, I chose Berkeley over Penn, NYU, Michigan, Northwestern, UCLA and the University of Washington about a quarter of a century ago. My second choice would have been UCLA.</p>
<p>Money was a bigger differentiator then - UCLA offered a full-tuition scholarship (worth all of $850 that first year); Berkeley (which made me pay the $850) was a concensus 6 or 7 in the rankings then.</p>
<p>I still spend a fair amount of time in Asia (I just flew back two days ago, and boy are my arms tired), and can tell you that its name carries at least as much weight there as any school in the U.S.</p>
<p>I'd venture that UCLA has a bigger reputation in Asia than it does on our own eastern seaboard.</p>
<p>By the way - I'd take the current USNWR ranking of Berkeley with a grain of salt. Its methodology devalues state schools. Everyone else ranks it in the top ten.</p>
<p>Its admissions office has placed more emphasis on grades than LSAT of late. Only Yale and Stanford accept a lower percentage of their applicants.</p>
<p>Here's an excerpt from the one article I could find with school to school comparisons for the California Bar Exam (from the February 9, 2001 issue of the San Francisco Recorder):</p>
<p>"BOALT HAS BEST BAR RESULTS IN STATE</p>
<p>"The school-by-school results for July's California Bar Examination are in and Boalt students' first-time pass rate is once again the best in the state...."</p>
<p>"Boalt's pass rate came in at a huge 94 percent, with UCLA School of Law at 90, followed by Stanford Law School at 85."</p>
<p>By way of context, the overall pass rate for the July 2004 California bar exam was below 50%.</p>
<p>i read in the LA Times that boalt's new dean will be trying to make drastic improvements at boalt. so perhaps its at a down time now but will get back up soon?</p>
<p>According to US news, Boalt has an 85% bar passage rate in California and 88% employment rate at graduation far below other schools. Stanford's bar rate in California is not much better at 86% but has 98% employment rate at graduation. UCLA has by far the best bar passage rate at 92%</p>
<p>Pass rates on the California bar vary considerably from year to year. I don't think falling within one point of Stanford's pass rate is particularly "frightening". </p>
<p>From what I've heard, Harvard and Yale graduates don't fare any better on the California bar than Stanford or Boalt graduates. It's the California bar exam that's frightening, not the performance of Boalt grads per se.</p>
<p>That the self-reported "employment rate at graduation" figure is notoriously open to manipulation.</p>
<p>Here's a summary of what percentage of first-time takers passed the July 2004 California bar exam (the most recent administration) from various law schools:</p>
<p>Stanford led the nation at 91%, followed by Harvard at 89%; Columbia, Penn, UVA and Yale came in at 88%. Boalt and UCLA tied for 7th nationally at 87%, beating Duke (86%), and NYU (83%); Georgetown, Michigan, Cornell, Chicago, Texas and U. of Michigan followed (all at 82%). Northwestern came in at 69%.</p>
<p>All applicants first-time applicants from John Marshall failed - now that's what I call frightening.</p>
<p>Just my opinion - but I always thought that Boalt was a top 10. Granted, the new rankings might put it at 13, but I don't think that a school can really change that much over the course of a year or two.</p>
<p>Also, my ever-present caveat: you're going to be sending your resumes to people who had pet dinosaurs growing up. (No offense to anyone here!:) ) THEY will think that Boalt is a spectacular school and UCLA great but not Boalt. Often, the current reality of a school's ranking will not matter so much as the perceptions of the people who make hiring decisions.</p>
<p>I don't think Penn or Duke have more prestige than Boalt, especially on the West Coast. Boalt is one of the traditional top 7 or 8 schools it the country, and its reputation ratings consistently reflect this. (Overall ratings are another matter entirely, and shouldn't be taken that seriously.) </p>
<p>I would certainly choose Boalt over those schools if I were focused on the West Coast, as it is probably second only to Stanford (and HY) there.</p>
<p>Boalt's LSAT's have been hurt by the elimination of AA in California, which has forced Boalt to lower medians across the board in order to get a sufficiently "diverse" student body. </p>
<p>USC and UCLA are another matter. I would not choose USC, personally, over a more national program unless I got a full ride. I would also want scholarship money from UCLA, probably. I would consider UCLA over programs like Duke and Penn, but probably not over programs like Virginia, Michigan, or other traditional top-six schools - unless the financial aid was significant. </p>
<p>This would be especially true if I were looking to work internationally. (Michigan, Boalt, and UVA would probably be best in this respect, as they have stronger long-term reputations.)</p>
<p>I really don't think enough American law graduates go to Europe to give anyone much of a name for just law. I'm sure that the international reputation of the university gives more weight, so Harvard is probably good. And concerneddad, that's Amused (with a capital A) to you.</p>