tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post7272298154405113956..comments2023-10-30T08:41:06.178-07:00Comments on Inside the Law School Scam: Top of the popsLawProfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.comBlogger113125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-64996938746648334362012-04-28T19:43:33.129-07:002012-04-28T19:43:33.129-07:00What about law schools who have lazy student advis...What about law schools who have lazy student advisors and cranky egotistical law professors (cranky even though they are excellently compensated and receive many other "benefits,") Suffolk Univ Law School comes to mind.<br /><br />Alumnus - unfortunatelyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-30926164344834975942012-03-14T17:19:39.284-07:002012-03-14T17:19:39.284-07:00To OL-
I wouldn't do it again. I went to a to...To OL-<br />I wouldn't do it again. I went to a top law school and top college. If if you have a job as a lawyer, and even if it pays well and is satisfying, you simply have to work too hard to stay at the top of the game. I haven't made millions, but I do make a few hundred thousand dollars a year in all. There are many lawyers who are hugely more successful than I am though. I spend all my spare time working. I am never done. Vacations involve CLE or current reading of new developments. My kids largely grew up seeing very little of me. This is not a family-friendly profession. Yes, in spite of all the hard, hard work, I have lost jobs and spent time not working because I could not get a satisfactory job. <br /><br />Go to a career where there is a better balance between supply of people and demand for those people if you want to have a good life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-86520548168918802592012-03-14T15:36:58.952-07:002012-03-14T15:36:58.952-07:00Thanks very much for your reply, 6:57. Sounds pr...Thanks very much for your reply, 6:57. Sounds pretty dismal. Hang in there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-69125741831212943922012-03-14T10:56:47.634-07:002012-03-14T10:56:47.634-07:00I do understand what you are saying, but reject th...I do understand what you are saying, but reject the notion that templates from other disciplines should just be laid over legal education. <br />You remind me of that character Kristin Wiig plays on SNL. Whenever anyone mentions something they have done, she sidles up to try to upstage them. No matter what it is, she's the expert, or the one who has the deepest, most personal engagement with the topic. "I had an ice cream sundae last night." KW's character,'Well, I had SEVEN ice cream sundaes. Matter of fact, I invented ice cream..." "I rewired my apartment." KW's character " I rewired my entire office building. Actually, I invented electricity." Or one of those stock British characters in movies who are always saying thinks like "When I was station chief in Istanbul..."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-3295046523969107632012-03-14T10:27:43.357-07:002012-03-14T10:27:43.357-07:00My problem with the rankings is perhaps driven by ...My problem with the rankings is perhaps driven by the fact that I practice international law (and I mean international - I'm in Europe this week, Asia next week, the US the next week) and so I get a long range view of what the reputation of US law schools are - or to put it another way what law schools people have heard of outside the US - and for the most part that comes out as Harvard, Columbia, Georgetown, Stanford. Other New York schools like NYU and Cornell are not that well known outside the US and that goes for most of the rest of the T14. Why the four I mentioned beyond Harvard are known outside the US is a function of their location and the number of international people they produce - so Columbia is in New York and its graduates get around, Georgetown in DC - ditto and Stanford is well known around the Pacific Rim. Yalies don't get noticed outside the US a lot (and most foreigner don't care where judges and professors went to school.)<br /><br />MacKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-33639291972542556792012-03-14T08:47:55.379-07:002012-03-14T08:47:55.379-07:00@5:39
I think you are missing the point. Academi...@5:39<br /><br />I think you are missing the point. Academic accreditation is primarily about outcomes - does the row awarding school have the right to confer the degree - does the graduate have the requisite knowledge to be a BSc, BA, MSc in the field. However, law school accreditation standards from the ABA are unusual in that they primarily focus on inputs and plant - is the school spending enough on full time professors, etc. In short the ABA and AALS engineered the accreditation standards from the beginning to force up cost - and have slowly even over the last decade dialled up the cost component further by trying to have full time faculty teach less (leading to more full time faculty.) As is apparent to anyone who looks at say the bar passage rates - the ABA barely skims outcome as an accreditation issue, which makes its whole accreditation standard suspect.<br /><br />Western State has a 26% bar passage rate but: "Western State College of Law is fully accredited by the American Bar Association (321 North Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60610, (312) 988-5000)."<br /><br />Appalachian School of Law has a bar passage rate of less than 50% yet charges $30k in tuition and has an anula cost of attendance it puts at $50k. Nonetheless:<br /><br />"ASL is fully accredited by the American Bar Association. As such, ASL graduates are eligible to sit for the bar examination in any U.S. state or the District of Columbia.<br /><br />"The Appalachian School of Law has been fully approved by the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar of the American Bar Association since 2006. The Section of Legal Education may be contacted at 321 North Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60610 or by phone at 312-988-6738."<br /><br /><i><b>QED</b></i><br /><br />MacK<br /><br />MacKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-69108364550065399642012-03-14T08:17:37.129-07:002012-03-14T08:17:37.129-07:00It is kind of silly that we have rankings at all, ...It is kind of silly that we have rankings at all, given that people really do have their own perceptions of which schools are more prestigious, and that combined with alumni placement is pretty much the thing that matters. I remember when I was applying and trying to explain to people that NYU was number 6 and Georgetown was only number 14, and people were like, "what? Georgetown is way more prestigious than NYU!" I was like, "but...US News..." Ultimately, I don't think there was much of a difference, so I chose the one that gave me some money instead of purely loans (guess which one that was!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-56007702363810204812012-03-14T07:45:32.941-07:002012-03-14T07:45:32.941-07:00(would be interesting if the plaintiffs in one of ...(would be interesting if the plaintiffs in one of the lawsuits currently pending could get discovery from USN&WR or depose the people who originally came up with the rankings).Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01310705673888220968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-1296191883383105562012-03-14T07:44:42.423-07:002012-03-14T07:44:42.423-07:00I remember reading recently (can't remember if...I remember reading recently (can't remember if it was a news article or just a comment online somewhere) something about how the USN&WR rankings were tweaked and modified until they got Harvard and Yale at the top, because the original formula didn't do that.<br /><br />If true, any Harvard or Yale administrator complaining about them should be rightly mocked, considering they were gamed from the beginning.Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01310705673888220968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-81609911769904226402012-03-14T07:36:44.657-07:002012-03-14T07:36:44.657-07:00DJM: I like your idea regarding state schools. The...DJM: I like your idea regarding state schools. The notion any but two or three state schools exist in a national marketplace at all is, well, silly. I looked at the USN ratings for a few state schools this morning: Alabama 29, Georgia 34, Ohio State 39, Colorado 44, Temple 58, Rutgers Newark 82. Speaking from the perspective of having practiced in the mid-Atlantic region for thirty years, interviewed God knows how many law students and served on the hiring committee a time or two the notion that one who intends to practice there should attend highed ranker Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State or Colorado in preference to lower ranked Temple or Rutgers is not just irrational but delusional. Those four higher ranked schools don't exist in the Philadelphia or New Jersey marketplace, both of which are thickly sown with Temple and Rutgers alums. It is fair to assume that all of these schools would retain their state and regional reputations, which is what is important to them, if they fell out of USN altogether. The fact that your school outranks LawProfs is relevant only in that it gives you bragging rights.<br /><br />RPLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-66931575705730267282012-03-14T07:35:36.064-07:002012-03-14T07:35:36.064-07:00One ironic thing about the DJM/ Law Prof proposal ...One ironic thing about the DJM/ Law Prof proposal is that it might actually make Deans earn their high salaries. If a third of all law schools are going to close but it is unclear based on what criteria they are going to shake out, deciding whether to become a "value proposition" law school or to continue to pursue a high US News rating may literally be a bet-the-firm decision. Making those decisions is why they pay CEO's the big bucks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-81709904445174019322012-03-14T07:08:54.981-07:002012-03-14T07:08:54.981-07:00Deans don't tie people up and make them come t...Deans don't tie people up and make them come to law school. The word has to get out, and it is getting out, that the decision to go to law schools is a very serious one. It is not for everyone. No one should do it unless they have investigated the schools, the profession, and the economy over time. Money (how much it costs) is an object, and has to be a major part of the consideration.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-68757584170496536062012-03-14T06:57:21.711-07:002012-03-14T06:57:21.711-07:00A few days ago I posted that it was starting to be...A few days ago I posted that it was starting to be too late for people to claim they have been misled. Someone argued that I was wrong because the need to is focus on the system and the great need for reform. <br /><br />I changed my mind. I don't blame the 0Ls for wanting to go to law school and hope to have a rewarding professional career. I do blame the schools for continuing to manipulate statistics and charging as much tuition as they do. Lower tier schools that charge the same as Harvard are particularly heinous. <br /><br />Let's keep the focus on the bad actors who created and continue to drain the students of every penny they can get. The 0Ls are gradually figuring it out and more information is getting out to them. But the schools are the problem here. The students are victims being bled to death by the avarice of the deans of the law schools.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-43786284046648317672012-03-14T06:01:37.033-07:002012-03-14T06:01:37.033-07:006:57 here. I work in the NYC office of a large fe...6:57 here. I work in the NYC office of a large federal agency. Due to the GOP's continual budget cutting, we've been reduced to a skeleton crew (we currently have 7 attorney openings in our office and might be able to fill half of those) and the workload has also skyrocketed because I work for a social welfare agency and, well, everyone is poor now. My office only hires people with at least a few years of experience, and mostly hires people from top schools - the lowest-ranked school anyone there comes from is Fordham I think, although there might be a couple older people from slightly lower-ranked schools. In this recent hiring attempt, the office received 300 applications before the job was even posted on USA jobs. Then, they only posted it for a week to control the number of applications. But, this is not a fun job! It consists mostly of writing the same brief over and over (the law is copied and pasted and the facts are usually very similar). And because of the workload, you get about 2-3 days to write one brief (25 page federal court brief with large transcript). Whenever the paralegals screw something up or a judge gets mad, the attorney gets blamed. There's no real opportunity for advancement. Salary freeze for the past 2 years, probably to be extended, and you only get a "step increase" every three years. It's dismal. But, in the market right now, it's a steady job that pays ok and has benefits, and there aren't any of those out there, so we get tons of applications. I know for a fact that most of my younger coworkers would rather be doing something else and are just rationalizing this job as "experience" because they want to stay in NYC for family or other reasons and there are no other jobs in NYC. I've been there almost 4 years, and I knew I hated it and started looking for something else almost immediately. I've had exactly one real interview for an open position since I started looking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-20810287691743773542012-03-14T05:39:00.576-07:002012-03-14T05:39:00.576-07:00You said that the accreditation process only looks...You said that the accreditation process only looks at the size of libraries and the number of faculty. That is not true. You can quarrel with some of the <br />decisions, and I do, too. But it is not correct to say that size of the faculty and library are the only aspects of a school that receive scrutiny. <br /><br />I am all for tougher standards, but they should be promulgated within a system of education that trains students without subjecting them all to crushing debt. I am willing to experiment. But, I think it facile to simply invoke practices from other disciplines without considering the different histories, purposes, and cultures of those disciplines. In that vein, it is past the time to rethink the purposes of legal education, and to open up the ways we do it; not just in terms of classes within schools, but in terms of the types of schools that are available.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-46698447441193256692012-03-14T04:52:09.790-07:002012-03-14T04:52:09.790-07:00@3:57
When did you last hear of an extern taking ...@3:57<br /><br />When did you last hear of an extern taking part in the examination of law students, in dreaded "comprehensives" common in many science departments?<br /><br />Sorry, law school accreditation is "plant" orientated - it looks at the number of law professors that are full time - the full time professor to faculty ratio - the size of the library - all cost drivers. It is a lot less focussed on outcomes - because if it was many of the third tier would not be accredited - one of these schools has a bar pass rate of 26.4% (Western State) while six are in the 50 percent range and a further nine in the 60 percent range and 28 in the less than 80% range - to me, that is 59 law schools that ought to lose their accreditation or have it put under review. The "proof" as they say "is in the pudding." <br /><br />MacKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-34906445207598441462012-03-14T03:57:07.945-07:002012-03-14T03:57:07.945-07:00When the ABA visits law schools they read exams fo...When the ABA visits law schools they read exams for quality, visit classes to observe teaching, meet with professors (sometimes dropping in) study the curriculum, report on bar passage rates (an important, though not the only,way to judge results) and do a whole host of things besides noting the size of libraries and the other things you mention. Your characterization is incorrect. <br /><br />We already have a two-tier profession. We always have, and there is no reason to think that will ever change. But right now people are paying large amounts to enter the profession, regardless of the "tier" in which they end up practicing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-24627715129544000692012-03-14T02:19:52.328-07:002012-03-14T02:19:52.328-07:00To quote the great helmsman "Letting a hundre...To quote the great helmsman "Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting progress in the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land."<br /><br />Well maybe. USNWR report originated and continues as a marketing effort that seeks to maintain credibility and not challenge the readers need for "confirmation bias." Realistically, if you asked a broad swathe of people to name the top 5 US law schools, they would almost all name one of the T-14 with probably Harvard as number 1. Outside the US, if you asked foreign lawyers the list would probably put at the top 3 Harvard, Georgetown and Columbia (with Yale fairly far down pace the Clintons.) That does not mean that these are better law schools, just that these are the most familiar names. Within the top 20 or so I doubt that there is much if any difference in the quality of the education available to its students, though there may be a small (very small) ability spectrum in their intake. But if USNWR failed to put the same schools in the T14 and Harvard and Yale in the top 3 readers would not take it seriously because that is their perception and confirmation bias validates in their minds the USNWR ranking - it must be right because the top schools they expect are in the ranking as top schools.<br /><br />I personally and viscerally object to the idea of a two tier profession or two tiers of education. However, law schools are professional schools - they train their students in part to pass a licensing exam - accreditation was introduced in the early 20th century and accredited law schools. The origin of accreditation was the founding of Suffolk law school in Boston - with an evening program targeting the poor and lower middle class taught mostly by judges and practitioners with few if any full time faculty. Suffolk was very successful and trained good lawyers and soon was joined in Boston by the YMCA Law School George Washington University in Washington, D.C., Chicago-Kent, and the University of Buffalo. Many of these schools were independent of universities and almost all had part-time and evening programs. <br /><br />This was regarded as a disaster by Yale, Harvard and the other white-shoe upper middle class law schools - not only were these schools letting in to the law the lower orders, but they were often graduating better lawyers. So the AALS and ABA fought to impose the requirement that law school be accredited - and the professoriate made sure that the accreditation standards required a mostly full time faculty, finally winning that battle in the 1950s when even Suffolk sought accreditation. <br /><br />The result is an absolute uniformity in law school design which, by its nature, makes that education extremely expensive. Notably the ABA Law School accreditation standards are not like other accreditation standards in that they are almost totally process and plant orientated - how big is you library, how many full time professors do you have - and eschew any real attention to results - how qualified are your graduate. If you look at other accreditation standard - they are outcome focussed - are your final exams tough enough, sending externs to examine degree awarding standards, etc. <br /><br />So to be clear - I do not believe in a two tier education system, but I do believe in competition and the idea that we can have a variety in law schools not prohibited by a self interested AALS, ABA and professoriate. <br /><br />MacKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-48444619961404265352012-03-14T00:00:26.228-07:002012-03-14T00:00:26.228-07:00I like DJM's idea. I attended the University ...I like DJM's idea. I attended the University of Nebraska, and I believe it is exactly the type of school you're talking about. Strong regional placement, low tuition at a public (Big Ten) University. <br /><br />I have to wonder whether our current administration would be interested, however. They seem very interested in US News rankings right now. (Currently we're tied for the 84th most amazing law school in America - as an alum, this is a very impressive conversation piece at cocktail parties I attend). In fact, the administration from Nebraska Law sent out a letter a few months ago asking for $10 donations from all the alumni who had never given anything. As I recall, according to the letter nearly 90% of alumni had never donated anything (could not believe that they mentioned that). Anyway, they didn't want my $10 because they needed $10, they wanted it because it would increase the percentage of alumni who give, apparently a factor in the US News rankings. Pretty sad.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-1411112530326606962012-03-13T22:52:56.703-07:002012-03-13T22:52:56.703-07:00@6:57 "I work with multiple top 14 and top 5...@6:57 "I work with multiple top 14 and top 5 grads. I even work with one Harvard grad. We are all stuck in the same sweatshoppy government job. The majority of us are unhappy with it and would prefer to be elsewhere, but there is nowhere to go, even for "top" grads."<br /><br />I really appreciate your honesty. Would you feel comfortable elaborating just a bit more on the type of office you work in and the nature of your work? Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-14849226121994766062012-03-13T20:16:40.728-07:002012-03-13T20:16:40.728-07:00DJM: I believe your basic concept could well work....DJM: I believe your basic concept could well work. The first step might be to put together a critical mass of like-minded faculty at schools that would be good candidates for such an association. As you say public schools would be the obvious choice, based on the novel idea that public legal education should be affordable for people from a variety of social backgrounds.LawProfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-27285392476402155292012-03-13T20:11:21.805-07:002012-03-13T20:11:21.805-07:00@ 0L MARCH 13, 2012 2:29 PM:
Your point of it bei...@ 0L <a href="http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/03/top-of-pops.html?showComment=1331674161799#c8147905707279575863" rel="nofollow">MARCH 13, 2012 2:29 PM</a>:<br /><br />Your point of it being counter-productive to marginalize the target audience is well made. I should have mentioned in the <a href="http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/03/top-of-pops.html?showComment=1331672743722#c7605158760839210373" rel="nofollow">comment</a> I posted above that I don't think I have ever used the term myself. I don't plan on incorporating it into my speech in the future. Law school has not worked out yet for me as I had hoped it would. That may change, it may not. But that's my issue. I wish you the best in whatever course of action you choose.<br /><br />(I've been away from the interwebs for a bit, so this comment I'm writing 5.5 hours later for 0L is a day late and a dollar short in internet terms. And therefore most likely a waste of time. But, whatever. I wanted to say it.)Crux of lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06572986619859564280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-59319901081054889742012-03-13T19:56:47.642-07:002012-03-13T19:56:47.642-07:00Oh, dear!Oh, dear!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-28529460121286566992012-03-13T19:33:50.695-07:002012-03-13T19:33:50.695-07:00LawProf: The idea definitely draws upon your Stan...LawProf: The idea definitely draws upon your Stanford concept. Gaining leadership from one of the top schools might be ideal--but now that Stanford is no. 2, they probably won't give up US News. If only you'd had a contract for them to sign last week :)<br /><br />I wonder if this idea would work particularly well for a group of state schools. I think the public schools have always struggled especially hard to win the US News formula. The things that should count in our favor (lower tuition, some commitment to the good of the state) don't matter there--or even work against us.<br /><br />Plus, with the contraction in BigLaw, more T14 grads are seeking the smaller firm, regional, and government jobs that used to attract many Tier 1-2 public law grads. Maybe this would be an opportune time for those public schools to solidify relationships with regional employers through a value proposition? A group of public schools might also make a good alliance because their grads tend to compete in different markets (except here in Ohio, where we seem to have more public and private law schools than any state needs). <br /><br />@6:59, I wondered about your ESP as well! But I posted, then the post disappeared (maybe into the spam filter) and I reposted. You must have been reading for that flash of initial post. I am definitely waiting to hear from Bruh and MacK!DJMhttp://moritzlaw.osu.edu/faculty/bios.php?ID=38noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5164886390834386622.post-86621997465353756442012-03-13T19:13:30.655-07:002012-03-13T19:13:30.655-07:00DJM: That's a very intriguing proposal. Last w...DJM: That's a very intriguing proposal. Last week I suggested that Stanford do something along those lines (cut tuition and simply refuse to cooperate with USN) but of course a collective effort along those lines would have a better chance of success.<br /><br />Harvard was charging $26K a year 20 years ago (in present dollars) and $15K a year in present dollars 30 years ago, so there's no reason why a "value proposition" school couldn't be high quality, unless one believes there were no high quality law schools a couple of decades ago (indeed technology should make it possible to deliver the same quality of education that was provided a generation ago at a far cheaper price).LawProfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05174586969709793419noreply@blogger.com