tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post3469416424262475682..comments2023-10-30T08:41:06.178-07:00Comments on Inside the Law School Scam: Eve of DestructionLawProfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-68708963856437520552011-09-27T08:06:22.746-07:002011-09-27T08:06:22.746-07:00Transparency can do more than just affect the tota...Transparency can do more than just affect the total number of applicants.<br /><br />We also have to look at who those applicants are. The people who are going to be most easily dissuaded are the ones who don't really want to be lawyers in the first place. Replacing them with people who will be happy as a lawyer would be a huge improvement.BL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-86304673324748495002011-09-27T06:48:48.358-07:002011-09-27T06:48:48.358-07:00No, I'm not exactly sold on the idea that tran...No, I'm not exactly sold on the idea that transparency will have no effect. It will have an effect on those who are grown up enough to see law school as mainly a financial transaction - that is, those who are actually adult enough for someone to pay them to give them legal advice.<br /><br />Sure, plenty of people sign up for law school without having quite this kind of grown-up attitude, and this kind of info won't have a great deal of impact on them. But at least they won't be able to say that they weren't warned.Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-13670810240311958772011-09-27T04:01:12.470-07:002011-09-27T04:01:12.470-07:0012:49, there is just *no* way that "if the tr...12:49, there is just *no* way that "if the truth came out, you would see this mass exodus tha twould devastate legal academia." Those who are post here to try and punish or destroy law professors, this is pure fantasy and wishful thinking. If your goal is to "devastate legal academia," find another cause, because transparency won't do that. 2:00 is right -- increased disclosure might have an initial year or two's chilling effect on enrollment, but it wouldn't drop by more than 15%, and then it would pick right back up and continue to build. What makes you think that 50% of people who currently take the LSAT are reasonable enough to realize they might not be at the top of the class? Even with full transparency, people's natural optimism will drive them to boundedly rational decisions and, so, to law school in droves. Transparency will do nothing in the medium term except legitimize the system so that there are no threats to its continuation in the long term.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-10094798727250254962011-09-27T02:00:25.783-07:002011-09-27T02:00:25.783-07:00Yep, here in Australia, virtually no universities ...Yep, here in Australia, virtually no universities publish stats of employment etc, but still the lemmings flock to it. Essentially, there are far too many liberal arts losers with big egos who can't do maths and can't or wont work with their hands (myself included). Law school is a magnet for such people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-15452862901715540762011-09-27T00:49:25.390-07:002011-09-27T00:49:25.390-07:0012:32, I think you're underestimating the shee...12:32, I think you're underestimating the sheer degree of fraud in these numbers. I think the true job placement for a tier 2/3/4 school is that 25-35% of the graduates get full time jobs as attorneys. It's night and day different from the "top students make $160k, mediocre ones make $80k" lie that you see perpetuated by the schools. If the true numbers came out, the number of people taking the LSAT would plummet and I think total enrollment would fall by 25-50%. One group - wealthy kids with low LSATs - would see their enrollment go up but every other group would run like hell. <br /><br />If the truth came out, you would see this mass exodus that would devastate legal academia. That's why the schools are fighting to hard to keep the fraud going (for example, see the ABA committee decision of this morning, to no longer distinguish between part time vs. full time or mcdonalds employee vs. lawyer employment when collecting statistics).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-18276983721289531162011-09-27T00:32:34.129-07:002011-09-27T00:32:34.129-07:00William Ockham said.... 9:04(second) I hope you&#...William Ockham said.... 9:04(second) I hope you're right. And it's a good point that laws students are risk aversive and thus available to the facts revealed by open disclosure. But here is how I see it structured. The schools at the law school pinnacle place almost all their graduates so they lose almost no students to disclosure. Those they do can be instantly replaced by students who would otherwise go to T-14 schools. And so on. At least through T-30 there's not going to be much attrition. And what there is can be quickly scavenged from further down the top tier. Remember by skimming off the top of the class at even the lowest Tier 1 schools your getting people with 164 and up LSATs. So it's not like you're compromising the quality of your class by much. Also remember that not much more than a decade ago a 160 LSAT would get you into all but the 10 or 12 highest rated law schools in the country. In Tier 2 the same system keeps working itself down the hierarchy. Temple Law fills the bottom quarter of it's class out of the top half of Seton Hall. Seton Hall takes Villanova's best and brightest. But in Tier 2 no one's taking students with less than 155 LSATs. This game of musical chairs works it's way through Tier 3 and Tier 4. Schools with 152 LSAT cutoffs reduce it to 150. The 150's dip to 147 and so on. Even down at the bottom of Tier 4,Thomas Jefferso Law School of class action fame, has a 25th percentile of 149. Also not to forget a 150 LSAT converts to a 120 IQ. Well over a standard deviation above average. But here's the really depressing numbers. 50,000 people started law school in 2011. Something over 150,000 took the LSAT in 2010-2011. So that if half of the 50,000 people decided not to go to law school, with over 100,000 left over people who had taken the LSAT the law schools would only have to convince 1 out of 4 to go to law school and the would be full, back up to their 50,000 quota. I'm hoping you're right, but please help me figure out how I'm wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-11470774676549525022011-09-26T21:12:13.985-07:002011-09-26T21:12:13.985-07:00@9:04: Waiting out the opposition is definitely a ...@9:04: Waiting out the opposition is definitely a viable tactic for law schools. No one makes a living criticizing law schools, they eventually have to get on with their lives. Law schools have tons of money coming in and can just wait out their critics. Put in a plan to 'look into things' over 3-5 years, and by the end you can pretend it never happened, no one who cared will be around anymore to remember what you were supposed to be doing.<br /><br />But, I don't think that sort of calculated plotting is going on. I think the legal academy has benefited from critics moving on, but not in a creepy conspiratorial way.<br /><br />Instead, I think it's just that this is how professors deal with things. They talk, write an article, and poof! Problem dealt with! They simply don't live in a world of actions. I think they honestly believe that a law review article or a seminar discussion about the topic is a real step.BL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-37443458660990407022011-09-26T21:06:31.635-07:002011-09-26T21:06:31.635-07:00Maybe I'm reading her tone wrong, but to me it...Maybe I'm reading her tone wrong, but to me it just sounded a bit empty and insincere.<br /><br />She wants to write a "somewhat hip booklet for prospective students."<br /><br />You don't need to have a 'burn down the house' attitude, but she comes across to me as just viewing the crisis as another opportunity for professorial play time.<br /><br />I agree that the movement needs to not marginalize itself by destroying any chance of a coalition, but these aren't new issues. They've been building for decades. So far, all the professoriate has done is talk. At what point can people start saying 'nut up or shut up?'BL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-68808827741992359932011-09-26T21:04:56.491-07:002011-09-26T21:04:56.491-07:00"I have a strong hunch that whatever the leve..."I have a strong hunch that whatever the level of disclosure the law schools will still be able to fill their enrollments and more."<br /><br />I don't agree with that at all. Law students are very risk averse people and if they saw that, in reality, only 1/3 or so of tier 2/3/4 grads get jobs as lawyers they would run the other way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-56916428184990200822011-09-26T21:04:05.763-07:002011-09-26T21:04:05.763-07:00Exactly BL1Y. "We've looking into that&qu...Exactly BL1Y. "We've looking into that" means "Give them something to calm them down for now."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-11872911570262432752011-09-26T20:43:54.609-07:002011-09-26T20:43:54.609-07:00BL1Y, I expected something like the basic capacity...BL1Y, I expected something like the basic capacity to distinguish allies from adversaries. Everyone must have missed the part where she's been talking to students, including in class, about these issues. It's bizarre to hear a group whose goal is "raising awareness" refuse to do exactly that just because the questions come from a law professor. Malloy and the rest can shit on people who actually want to engage with you (and who would, considering the treatment they now can expect?), but you'll end up with no sympathizers, no coalition, no voices from the inside joining yours. That will probably delay progress -- and even if others work to address these issues, it won't be because you persuaded them. You'll have nothing to show for all this but an echo chamber for repetitive rage that everyone else has stopped listening to. But if the goal is to marginalize yourselves enough to be non-factors in whatever constructive change does happen, then bravo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-19888776562237227482011-09-26T20:12:27.742-07:002011-09-26T20:12:27.742-07:00I have a strong hunch that whatever the level of d...I have a strong hunch that whatever the level of disclosure the law schools will still be able to fill their enrollments and more. As an example, for atleast two generations architecture schools have been where law schools are today. Only a small portion of their graduates are ever employed as architects. And not just the lower tier schools. A couple of years ago one of the literary magazines (Harpers? Atlantic?)did a story by Harvard graduate going to his classes 25th reunion. Barely a third of his glass were still employed in the field. Yet architecture schools across the country are growning with applicants. Of Ph.D programs I won't even speak. Same fate for us? William OckhamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-86659426753835250182011-09-26T19:03:45.819-07:002011-09-26T19:03:45.819-07:00@6:11: I agree that many people are quick to alien...@6:11: I agree that many people are quick to alienate potential allies, and that can be a pretty poor strategy.<br /><br />But, what else do you expect if you've been hearing professors and administrations and the ABA saying for years "Oh, yeah, yeah, we're totally going to look into that."BL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-59453447308602110642011-09-26T18:55:01.076-07:002011-09-26T18:55:01.076-07:00Deborah,
Your students are paying you with non-...Deborah, <br /> <br />Your students are paying you with non-dischargable debt. You aren't paying me. You'd do well not to snarl at the hand that feeds you. <br /><br />If you want a research assistant, pay one. <br /><br />Also, you missed the part after googling, calling of the principals on the phone and asking them questions. That's the real research. Any jackass can google.Terry Malloynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-86270383066745117892011-09-26T18:36:37.465-07:002011-09-26T18:36:37.465-07:00People who matter demand that the government GIVE ...People who matter demand that the government GIVE them $200k per job. <br /><br />"$200K Per Job? Timothy Geithner Says White House Jobs Plan Is Still a Bargain"<br />http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/geithner-good-chance-jobs-act-pass/story?id=14609951<br /><br />Pathetic and meek nerds BORROW $200,000 to get a job, and even then they get scammed.<br /><br />Backbone people. Backbone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-74032302161738322892011-09-26T18:22:26.713-07:002011-09-26T18:22:26.713-07:00Well said 6:11.Well said 6:11.LawProfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-37958029369583405022011-09-26T18:11:46.444-07:002011-09-26T18:11:46.444-07:00Once again this unsympathetic bunch lash out at so...Once again this unsympathetic bunch lash out at someone who's actually trying to help the cause. Are professors clueless bystanders who could make good by getting involved on your side, or are they evil and unredeemable such that you have exactly zero potential allies inside the law schools? I've heard both views, but we can't have it both ways. If you choose the former, treat Deborah's questions as what they are -- sincere attempts to understand these complaints and help. That seems like a kind of response you'd want. And if you take the other view, why in the hell are you commenting on a law professor's blog? Moan at ATL or one of the toilet sites if you really feel that no professors (except of course Saint Campos) can possibly be persuaded by your position. <br /><br />You're not doing the cause any favors by being a mob of insufferable pricks and acting like nobody is "pure" enough to help you. That's just stupid, stupid, stupid.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-85318677740145955142011-09-26T16:22:56.297-07:002011-09-26T16:22:56.297-07:00"My students graduate incapable of performing..."My students graduate incapable of performing basic research functions! LOL N00BS!"<br /><br />- Deborah Jones MerrittBL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-46383124972301437302011-09-26T15:54:29.008-07:002011-09-26T15:54:29.008-07:00Professor Merritt's line that she wants to col...Professor Merritt's line that she wants to collect the data is bullshit. It's a mere delay tactic. It's a procedural defense. The data could be collected in a few days if her school wanted to collect it. But the truth is that they don't want to collect it, see: http://abovethelaw.com/2011/09/quote-of-the-day-law-school-opacity/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-63437414109013789052011-09-26T15:49:23.457-07:002011-09-26T15:49:23.457-07:00I agree with BL1Y. Law review articles are among t...I agree with BL1Y. Law review articles are among the most useless ways to communicate an idea that I can think of. There are far better ways, such as blogs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-67914990447175135612011-09-26T15:25:40.301-07:002011-09-26T15:25:40.301-07:00Deborah: Davidoff still wasn't recognized for ...Deborah: Davidoff still wasn't recognized for his work qua professor. He was influential specifically because he left the academic arena to write. Had he written for law reviews instead of the NYT no one would care.BL1Yhttp://www.constitutionaldaily.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-71607834800156986272011-09-26T15:02:25.345-07:002011-09-26T15:02:25.345-07:00BL1Y: His recognition was for his writing (both a...BL1Y: His recognition was for his writing (both academic and weekly in the Times) -- *not* for being a board member. The group giving the awards divided the recipients into board members and nonboard members; my colleague is in the latter group. There are a lot of glib comments about the worthlessness of academic work, but I don't think the facts support those extreme statements--either for my colleague or many other professors.<br /><br />2:21: Yes, I have talked to my students, both informally and in a class I organized partly for this purpose. One of my students in the Business of Law seminar I taught last year wrote an excellent paper on the finances of legal education from a student's perspective. The full class discussed her paper, as well as a range of other student papers on the economics of law. <br /><br />I'm actually not as ignorant or naive about these issues as some commentators want to assume--I just believe in collecting as much information as possible. And just as my students often email me for answers on evidence questions they encounter at work, rather than doing the research themselves, I think it makes sense to ask others for leads. When I respond to my students' requests, I don't usually snarl at them while giving the info: In most cases, I could easily snap back, "just google it--it's called research!" But I appreciate the leads nonetheless, "Terry Malloy."Deborah Jones Merritthttp://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/bios.php?ID=38noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-37868813818426726612011-09-26T14:56:02.745-07:002011-09-26T14:56:02.745-07:00by "agencies" I meant other organization...by "agencies" I meant other organizations who would be gathering the information.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-33281456173696453892011-09-26T14:55:05.452-07:002011-09-26T14:55:05.452-07:00If law schools or agencies don't rely on self-...If law schools or agencies don't rely on self-reports, how are they going to get information? Is the idea to have law schools conduct investigations of former students? Finding where they work might be one thing, but salary info? Doesn't this have to come from graduates?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-65860386689355122392011-09-26T14:47:17.755-07:002011-09-26T14:47:17.755-07:00@2.32 - But shouldn't it present the worst cas...@2.32 - But shouldn't it present the worst case scenario as the most likely outcome, since that is what it is? Comparing two relatively unlikely outcomes and presenting them in a away which makes the uninitiated think they are easily achievable is not telling it like it is.Gilman Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06607416440240634159noreply@blogger.com