Sunday, November 16, 2014

Profiles in Academic Explosive Verbal Diarrhea: Nicholas Allard, Dean at Crooklyn Law School


http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/11/10/decline-in-bar-exam-scores-sparks-war-of-words/

Cockroach Strut: On November 10, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog featured a Jacob Gershman piece entitled “Decline in Bar Exam Scores Sparks War of Words.” From the opening:

“A steep decline in bar exam scores on the most recent test has led to an outbreak of finger-pointing over who’s to blame for the downward swing. 

In a sharply worded letter, the dean of Brooklyn Law School on Monday reproached the head of a national bar exam group for suggesting to law school leaders that their graduates who took the July exam were less prepared than students who sat for the test in previous years. 

The dean’s letter came in response to an October memo by Erica Moeser, the president of the National Conference of Bar Examiners, addressed to law school deans across the country in which she defended the integrity of the group’s exam and raised concerns about the ability of the would-be lawyers who took it.”

For $ome rea$on, this beady-eyed, snake bastard does not reproach himself and other law school deans, for consigning LEGIONS of students – each year – to dismal job prospects and soul-crushing levels of debt. But he’s looking out for students, right?!?! The article concludes:

“Brooklyn Law School Dean Nicholas W. Allard fired back on Monday with a letter to Ms. Moeser. He said he found her assertions unconvincing and demanded a “thorough investigation of the administration and scoring” of the July 2014 exam. 

“We don’t know what evidence you have to support this surprising (and surprisingly disparaging) claim, but we do have evidence about our own 2014 graduates, and it tells us precisely the opposite: their credentials were every bit as good as our 2013 graduates, if not even better,” he wrote. 

Ms. Moeser couldn’t be reached for comment on Monday. 

Ms. Moeser’s letter didn’t cite specific scoring data for the exam given in July. But it gels with figures released by states showing significant declines in the passage rates for many of them. The overall passage rate for the Texas exam given in July, for example, was 11 percentage points lower than last year’s results. Idaho, Iowa, Oregon and Washington were among other states reporting sharp drops.

The passage rate for Brooklyn Law School graduates who took the bar for the first time in July was nearly 10 percentage points lower than last year’s rate, Mr. Allard told Law Blog. He said the median LSAT score for the 2013 and 2014 cohorts was 163 in both cases. A private institution in downtown Brooklyn, Mr. Allard’s law school enrolls about 1,000 full-time students.

“What is her basis for saying the students are less able? I think that’s offensive. I don’t believe it,” Mr. Allard, who is also a senior partner at Squire Patton Boggs, told Law Blog on Monday.” [Emphasis mine] 

$omehow, Cockroach Nicholas Allard does not demand a “thorough investigation” of ABA-accredited diploma mills’ admi$$ion$ “standards” or employment “placement” figures. What a beacon of integrity and ethics, huh?!?! By the way, how many Crooklyn Class of 2014 grads did Squire Patton hire?

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2014_1110_moesermemo.pdf

Compare the Memos in Question: On October 23, 2014, Erica Moeser wrote the following, in her letter to all pond scum deans:

“In the wake of the release of the MBE scores from the July 2014 test administration, I also want to take this opportunity to let you know that the drop in scores that we saw this past July has been a matter of concern to us, as no doubt it has been to many of you. While we always take quality control of MBE scoring very seriously, we redoubled our efforts to satisfy ourselves that no error occurred in scoring the examinations or in equating the test with its predecessors. The results are correct. 

Beyond checking and rechecking our equating, we have looked at indicators to challenge the results. All point to the fact that the group that sat in July 2014 was less able than the group that sat in July 2013.” [Emphasis mine]

It seems that the NCBE performed its due diligence. They did so, in order to quell the bitching and crying among law school parasite deans and upset recent grads. Now take a look at Pig Allard’s November 10, 2014 response:

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2014_1110_allardmemo.pdf

“There is no explanation how you reached your conclusion, nor transparency to your process, so how can we have confidence in this self-serving unaudited assertion? Frankly, your statement rings hollow. Given how this exam affects the lives and careers of tens of thousands of graduates, you can do better and provide both the deans and graduates a more thorough review.” [Emphasis mine]

Yet, the dung beetle is perfectly fine with allowing law schools to make baseless assertions about job prospects and manipulate other data. On page two, the piece of trash wrote:

“In plain language, I disagree with you: It’s not the students, it’s the test.” 

This is a kindergarten response from a fully grown "man" who runs an in$TTiTTuTTion of "higher education." His mother must be very proud.  By the way, this is the best reply that this pig-faced buffoon could come up with - in the span of 18 days. That speaks volumes.

Conclusion: Nicholas Allard does not give one goddamn about his students, the overall JD Class of 2014, their employment outcomes, their futures, or their livelihoods. He simply doesn’t give a damn about them. His bloated, unjustified income is not tied to his customers’ fate. The leech only cares about one thing: getting more asses in seats, so that he can continue to nice, fat paycheck – via the federal taxpayer – for minimal “work.” As you can clearly see from his photo, this jackal hasn't missed many meals - or midnight snacks, for that matter.  The rodent is acting out of self-preservation, because he knows that even fewer people will apply to law school – if the cost continues to climb, job prospects remain weak, AND bar passage rates decline. In the event that three things persist, only waterheads will seriously consider this as a career option.

51 comments:

  1. Wonder what his pay is? His predecessor made $650,000/year.

    http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/06/brooklyn-president-.html

    Fucking predators.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesus Fucking CHRIST!

      Predator partner at Patton Boggs, that crashed and merged. Gotta get his CASH FOR NOTHING FROM THE TAXPAYER.

      It's getting to the point where this country needs to purge itself of these leeches by sending them to penal colonies where they try and scam each other for enough food to stay alive.

      They all belong in jail, but not one red cent should go to their support from the public.

      Delete
  2. These assholes are just in it for the money. They don't give a shit about the profession. They're not even in the profession.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Year after year, the entering (cl)asses at most law skules are demonstrably less qualified than their predecessors. Law skules that formerly filled their seats with mediocre butts are now plumbing the depths of the LSAT's 140s, 130s, and even 120s just to keep Nicholas All-Lard and his cronies in beefsteak.

    Old Guy

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's obvious that Allard subscribes to the best-defense-is-a-good-offense philosophy. Like all of the worthless reprobates who run law schools, Allard will stoop to any level to protect his inflated and undeserved salary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Defending the law schools today is the equivalent of making the case for more child molesters. Only a mentally sick person would do so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Law professors are all child molesters. I felt dirty and used each time lectures were over; a perverted gray haired man taking advantage of people a third his age. I'd have felt less dirty had he fondled me in the law school toilets.

      Hey wait. Leiter! Are you fucking kidding me? Stop masturbating to what I just wrote. That's disgusting!

      Delete
  6. Not to mention how easily those supposedly all-telling median LSAT's can be gamed. My mediocre institution's median LSAT dropped 5 points in the last 2 years, and the school has a practically open admission for transfers from our nearby TTTT who constitute a sizable portion of the class. Of course, their LSAT's don't factor into the equation.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Don't forget the part-time and nighttime law programs at many of these shitholes. Their lsat scores typically aren't calculated into the matriculants data.

    It must be nice running a law school and doing whatever the fuck you wanna do. If you don't have a conscience, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  8. “We don’t know what evidence you have to support this surprising (and surprisingly disparaging) claim, but we do have evidence about our own 2014 graduates, and it tells us precisely the opposite: their credentials were every bit as good as our 2013 graduates, if not even better,” he wrote.

    Not true. While BLS's median LSAT did not go down between 2010 and 2011, its 25th LSAT score fell from 162 to 160. More importantly its median gpa fell from 3.45 to 3.36.

    Similarly Hofstra's bar results fell 11 points this year. Its gpa fell from 3.58 for fall 2010 to 3.32 for 2011.

    Law School Transparency is a wonderful website. It takes only a minute to determine whether a dean is lying. Dean Allard should check it before he lies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not surprising about Hofstra. It is in a death plunge in US News. I don't know why anyone would go there.

      Delete
    2. The GPA is even easier to game. Just take the Poli Sci and History majors with high GPAs.

      In the past with STEM grads going to law school the GPAs would actually be lower. But now those same STEM grads are going to take a pass.

      I always found it funny that law GPAs were so much higher than medical school GPAs.

      Delete
    3. Hey, don't denigrate my 3.8 in underwater basketweaving from Bumblefuck U!

      Old Guy

      Delete
    4. I don't know why people say that... underwater basketweaving sounds pretty difficult to me.

      Delete
  9. We need to generate a list of THE law schools that NO ONE should attend, EVER.

    And publicize it EVERWHERE, without except. They should be branded as CERTAIN FAILURE schools.

    Only then can we simplify the message so that children will understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would be easier to write a list of the law schools that some people might reasonably consider attending.

      Old Guy

      Delete
    2. I agree with Old Guy. We should list the few acceptable options among law schools. Nando says Top 8, I say Top 5.

      Delete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    5. The racist "black booty" troll is a parasite, riding like a barnacle on Nando's open comments policy. This troll has never written a single word against the law school scam. Fuchsberg Law Center is a scam, and that's all a prospective student needs to know. Forget this racist piece of shit and his homoerotic fantasies.

      Delete
    6. Mentally ill racist! Painter is long gone. That fantasy only exists in your own sick mind.

      You spend too much time at your computer. Why not get a job, get your own place, and quit leeching off your parents?

      Delete
    7. @537/546,

      Dude, ARE you Painter? Um, are you sure? You seem to be a lily-white jobless wonder who *REALLY* has "racism" on the brain. Do you have some YOUTUBE LINKS for us, by any chance? YOU would fucking know a thing or two about being a parasite, abusing a site's "open comments policy," and leeching off of your parents - you practically wrote the book those subjects. Project, much?

      Delete
    8. what "open post" policy?>

      Delete
  11. The quality of students (outside of HYS) has been going down for several years. Really smart students are avoiding law school. While the dimwits plug along and apply and attend. This is the expected result.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's expected because the profession of law is garbage.

      Delete
  12. Here is a comment from Allard from an interview conducted only two months ago:

    "We are unwavering in admitting only those who we believe can do well in law school, pass the bar and land good jobs. Given their performance we can proudly say that we know how to pick ‘em."

    http://campus.lawdragon.com/2014/09/14/dean-limelight-brooklyn-law-school-nick-allard/

    Clearly Allard misspoke. He should have said: "Given their performance we can petulantly say that we know how to blame others for our own failures. We also know how to sling unfounded self-serving allegations and how to construct easily refuted defenses."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What an arrogant ass All-Lard is! Just look at these data:

      http://www.lstscorereports.com/schools/brooklyn/2013/

      Just over half of the students are working at least nominally in law nine months after graduation. Some "performance"! Note that by no means all of those students "land good jobs": many are self-employed (which for a fresh graduate typically means unemployed), and others get tiny salaries or unstable positions.

      While you're at that site, go to the tab labeled "Costs". A typical student getting no discount ("scholarship" in the dishonest language of law skules) and financing the whole cost with loans would graduate with about $312k in non-dischargeable debt.

      Old Guy

      Delete
    2. Yep, Allard really knows how to pick 'em. It's a proven fact that the vast majority of his admitted students either know how to sign loan documents or can quickly learn how to do so. Some of them have taken out loans for truly impressive amounts.

      It's astonishing that Allard manages to find so many intelligent and talented students year after year. That must be why he gets paid so much.

      Delete
    3. Old Guy, lol at "All-Lard"!

      Delete
  13. Sounds like Allard's the new Nora Demleitner.

    ReplyDelete
  14. These T2 schools in super competitive markets are such traps. They offer job prospects comparative to midwestern T3s but much more debt, especially given cost of living. You might get by with a T2 degree in a midwestern state where you are at worst the second best school in the state, but in NY, DC, California, Florida, etc. there are legions of T1 grads ahead of you.

    For example, New York has Columbia, NYU, Cornell, Seton Hall, Fordham, SUNY Buffalo, and even much maligned Albany (not to mention the national grads that biglaw draws there) with better employment numbers than Crooklyn. A Crooklyn grad who isn't in the top ~10% necessary to get biglaw will be screwed even if he gets an attorney job.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "All point to the fact that the group that sat in July 2014 was less able than the group that sat in July 2014.”

    You have a typo here-- presumably in the second date.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://outsidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2013/05/dean-nick-allard-and-future-of-scam.html

    Back on May 29, 2013, Adam B. posted an OTLSS entry labeled "Dean Nick Allard and the Future of the Scam." Read the portion below:

    "Despite the plummeting law school applications from the highest LSAT scorers, which could prove problematic as bar passage rates in some jurisdictions continue to tank, the law schools still have a few tricks up their sleeves. As the downward spiral becomes permanent, not just a blip resulting from “bad press,” the deans must find new methods for generating income for these failing institutions.

    For example, Brooklyn Law School recently announced that it will offer a two-year J.D. program designed for non-traditional students, i.e. middle-aged students, foreign-trained lawyers, and other people trying to reenter the workforce in a second post-recession career. Obviously, this is a particularly nasty scam, which attempts to attract the least hirable potential students. Most law firms do not want to hire older lawyers even if they have years of experience. It goes without saying that the majority of older lawyers will not have the ability to scrape together a makeshift solo practice, nor would most want to or plan to.

    BLS is marketing this new program as a great way for older people to reignite their careers and to find employment stability before they retire. It is only incidental, I suppose, that it is also a great way to scam unemployed middle-aged people who think that a two-year program will cost less (it won’t).

    The BLS factory has always had a version of this scam: the night program. However, the night program still admits mostly students in their 20s and early 30s with LSAT/GPA scores that the school wanted to divert away from USNWR (until recently). Most of the students in the night program are rejects from the full-time program. Now, with applications from the more-informed internet users drying up, the school might think that older potential students may be easier to con. Perhaps they do not realize that the over-45 crowd reads blogs at almost the same rate as the rest of us."

    As others have pointed out, garbage pits such as Crooklyn Law $chool will do anything – and come up with almost any scheme – in order to enroll more dumbasses. After all, these kids are a mere means to an end, i.e. big bags of federal taxpayer dollars, in the form of NON-DISCHARGEABLE student loans.

    Remember, “law professors” and administrators do not care what happens to their students. Hell, most CDOs only help those in the top 10% of the class find jobs, i.e. the ones who don’t need much assistance in landing decent employment – while ignoring the rest. Then again, the pigs’ bloated salaries are not tied – in any way – to their students’ job prospects or outcomes. Isn’t “higher education” great?!?! Imagine if these cockroaches worked in private industry, without the reliance on government handouts.

    ReplyDelete
  17. In searching Squire Patton's web site, it looks like they have exactly one attorney on staff that graduated from Brooklyn Law School.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The way Dean Allard hides behind his students is pretty disgusting.

    These deans are admitting more and more applicants who are probably not lawyer material in this hyper-competitive, saturated market. And then, when this is pointed out, he gets all offended. "What a cruel thing to say! How dare you insult these poor students! This is just mean. And, if my personal school happens to have a large number of minority or women students, then your comments are racist/sexist also! How could you?!"

    In this way, he deflects criticism from himself and onto his victims, while appearing to stand up for them.

    Really, he's using his students as shields, and once they're all full of bullets he'll cast them aside and find other shields. He won't think twice about them, after they've served their purpose to him.

    There are a lot of other fields these students probably could succeed in AND which require much less debt. It's nothing short of cruel to pull them into a dead-end law school like Brooklyn.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "How dare you insult our poor dumb suckers . . . I mean students!"

      Delete
    2. Excellent comment.

      We live in strange days, and maggots like Allard are lying as if their lives depend on it. If you're considering law school, just remember that your own life could literally depend on not believing his lies.

      Delete
  19. I am confused. Don't most Brooklyn students take the NY Bar?

    ReplyDelete
  20. So which are the five law schools "worth" attending as of 2015?

    Just curious.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nando,

    Is there a way I can email you? I'm a 0L with my first admissions offer in hand and I'd really like to make sure I'm not making a horrible, horrible mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Every time I go to an event with a lot of college grad adults, they all seem to be doing very, very well for themselves. It's just law that is such a ridiculous struggle. Well, no longer young a few years out of law school, we're talking reaching middle age here.

    Everyone has several years of experience, most have at least a high five figure and maybe have crossed into solid six figure territory. The hours are much better, the job security is much greater.

    Most have mortgages on a home, most are married, have a kid or two and another on the way.

    I just don't fit in at all and can't stand it. I hear how bad the economy allegedly is, but it seems like as long as you didn't go to law school you are fine. It wouldn't bother me so much if a chunk of people didn't have great outcomes, but just across the board everyone is doing so well.

    Unless these law schools start closing down and outcomes really get exposed, I just feel like a total outlier, a complete loser that just failed miserably at everything. I did try really hard and just couldn't get anywhere. If it's really because of massive overproduction of law grads I want to see some of that exposed, I want to see society as a whole nod and say "well law school was a total scam and of course law grads struggle badly, it's an awful profession" but I just don't see it.

    I don't mind struggling through life and not being successful, God knows around the world so many are in bad shape. But it just bothers me to feel like I am the only one, the only one out of my social circles that was such a total fuck up as to not have much of anything. It's really wearing on me, I'm probably permanently damaged now. I just wish I was normal at this point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To 1:10am:

      Please take heart!

      I graduated University of Illinois College of Law in 1974, January--4 semesters and 1 summer school. 1 semester short of the typical program.

      I graduated from under graduate school in 7 semesters, not the typical 8. I am far from any level of genius, but as such, but I am not stupid.

      It took me 2 years or so to find a job after graduation from law school. I was admitted on the Friday before classes started at law school on Monday, so I figured I was in the the bottom 1 % of the class. I graduated a semester early in the top 25% of my class.

      So what was that effort worth? Very little. It still took me 2 1/2 years to find a job. The top students in my class started at $70,000 or so. I started at $12,000.

      (I taught percussion-drum set playing-while I looked for a law job at $14,000 a year-so practicing law was a "step down.')

      My younger sister, a Bachelor's degreed computer scientist, started at Caterpillar Inc. at $21,000, with full benefits.

      I had 3 more years of post graduate education. I was SEVEN YEARS older, and she STARTED at more than a THIRD more than me, counting ONLY salary, not benefits.

      To all you 'lemmings:" I have been practicing law for 37 years. My p ostings on a number of blogs will clearly "connect" if you have been following along. I have posted as "Cincinnatus" and sometimes as "Boomer."

      I have three sons. All Eagle Scouts like me. I told them when they were young that they will not be lawyers as I would not approve it, that if they sought to be lawyers, I would not pay for their education, and if, despite this, they became a lawyer, IT WAS THEIR OWN DAMN FAULT.

      So, I have a solo practice I have built from scratch.

      You are NOT the only one.

      NOTHING of your current situation is your fault. The law school "process" is a criminal financial scam on children (though over age 18, but whom have no true understanding of how they are being abused.

      At age 62, having built a law practice virtually from scratch, living in a 5,000 finished square foot house:

      I CANNOT afford law school tuition at any law school in America, even were I to be able to continue to practice full time while attending law school.


      Strangely enough, at age 62, I still go to social functions and apologize for my being a lawyer, and all of them assume that I am doing much better than them. But I am not and it hurts me so, that I generally don't go to many such functions.

      At age 62, I have NO: life insurance,NO health insurance, NO disability insurance,NO employee stock benefit plan, NO paid vacation, NO personal days, NO subsidized lunch meals, and so on. (Like paid international travel…a good fringe of mine lived 4 years in China, traveling to Malaysia, Burma, Malaysia, etc.)

      In 37 years of adult life I have had 27 weeks of vacation. Do the math! And, being self-employed, even those weeks were UNPAID. So, who can afford to take a week off UNPAID?
      (I make these comments to those of you who a young and have no idea about all of this so early in your lives.

      For those of you who think that I am a "low level"" failed complainer, STAND DOWN:

      I am an Eagle Scout. ((So are my three sons.)

      I am a Philmont Ranger 1971.

      I am a Philmont Ranger Trainer, 1972.

      I am the Philmont Training And Evaluation Coordinator ( superior staff over 120 Ranger staff.).

      I have prepared blueprints for a single-family residence, and the built the house. I also surveyed the lot and staked the foundation excavation.

      I make my own furniture. I can weld. I can mud drywall joints.

      Whatever, I have my act together.

      To the poster, do not give up. That you posted is a call for help, and I am here for you.

      My sons, they seem to loose hope and turn to me.

      I say "I have backbone enough for all of us."

      You post if you need to communicate with me. I will do all I can to help you.






      Delete
    2. A cry for help out of frustration I think. Just not wanting to be the only one really.

      I think I am just going to leave law, and I will do anything else. I think a lot of the trades have apprenticeship programs, so I'll just go that route.

      I will wait to see law schools close down, that's what I'll keep my hope alive for. If half of them close down it would show the problem is overproduction and not just in me.

      Delete
  23. http://jdunderground.com/all/thread.php?threadId=80735

    On November 11, 2014, at 12:58 pm, JDU contributor “guyingorillasuit” started a thread simply labeled “2014 grads are failing the bar exam.” Here is his hilarious original post:

    “1) Law schools admit a lower-scoring cohort of 1Ls in 2011.
    2) These folks graduate in 2014, and can't pass the bar.
    3) The bar examiners write a letter, stating: "It's not our exam, it's your retards."
    4) Law school deans write back, stating: "Our retards are every bit as smart as those who were admitted previously."

    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/11/10/decline-in-bar-exam-scores-sparks-war-of-words/

    Good times.”

    Several of these waterheads will fail the bar exam MULTIPLE TIMES – establishing beyond doubt that they are pathetic losers. You can feel sorry for them if you wish. In the final analysis, these men and women never had the acumen to be licensed attorneys. It is sickening that the law school pigs get the taxpayer windfall. But these graduates/bar failures need to get off the ground, dust themselves off, and find a way to pay back their loans.

    On the same date, at 6:28 pm, user “tsmonk” wrote this gem:

    “I like how Dean Allard in his reply is basically saying "look these kids paid us a lot of money, you've got to pass them!"

    This comment then led to the following exchange:

    “scammersgunnascam (Nov 11, 2014 - 7:35 pm)

    Bingo! How transparent can you be? If there's an year in which the bar passage rates dip, and so does the average passing score...that must means the test (for the last 30 years) is the odd man out not Crooklyn's special snowflakes, who are just as special if not special-ler than ever!

    I'm sure Brooklyn realizes it will eventually lose its accreditation via too low bar passage rates.
    ________________________________________
    chicagojoe (Nov 11, 2014 - 9:25 pm)

    What I love even more is how he claims it's an injustice that students have to pay more to prepare for a bar exam after spending tons on a legal education.

    Uh...

    1) they don't have to spend tons on a legal education;
    2) if you people actually did your job, there would be no need for BarBri

    Also give him props for mentioning the word "unauditied." How about we audit Brooklyn's placement statistics for the last 10 years, eh?
    ________________________________________
    scammersgunnascam (Nov 11, 2014 - 10:59 pm)

    now there's an audit i could get behind!”

    Again, Nicholas Allard does not give one damn about his students, their health, or their futures. He is only pretending to care, because he wants to present himself as a concerned dean. In the end, this cockroach ONLY cares about keeping the scam going for as long as he can.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Let’s head to the Comments section of this WSJ Law Blog article:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/11/10/decline-in-bar-exam-scores-sparks-war-of-words/tab/comments/

    On November 11, 2014, 1:53 am, “EFM Lawyer” landed this overhand right to the pigs’ snouts:

    “The Brooklyn Law Dean misses the whole point of what Ms. Moeser is saying. 10% fewer Brooklyn Law grads passed the bar in July 2013 compared with those taking it in July 2014. That would imply less capable graduates. The fact that Brooklyn Law 1Ls had the same average LSAT score emphasizes the point! They came in just as capable as the prior year’s students. They left without having made as much progress. Based on the numbers, whatever Brooklyn Law does is apparently not as effective.”

    On the same date, at 10:10 am, commenter “TKBLaw” wrote:

    “None of this is good for the legal education status quo, which, ironically, is probably good for the legal profession.”

    One user, employing the handle “But see” responded on November 11, 2014, at 10:59 am:

    “While Dean Allard is correct that the median LSAT at Brooklyn held steady from the class entering Fall 2010 to Fall 2011, it has since fallen 7 points (from 163 to 156) for the class entering Fall 2014. I would guess this will explain future bar pass declines.”

    No wonder Dung Beetle Allard is seeking to have the bar examiners lower their standards. Perhaps, he should apply a chunk of his commode’s endowment to that end.

    At 2:47 pm on November 11, 2014, “Hello TAG” wrote:

    “When we’re talking about a 10% drop in passage rate, this undoubtedly impacts the bottom of the law school pile, not the “median” student. I don’t expect lawyers to be good at math, even a dean of a decent law school, but a “median” score is not the same as the “average” score. Law scores only really care about “median” scores, though, as those are what drives the US News & World Report rankings. But I would make a strong wager that the average score was lower in 2011 than 2010. And if one were to really dive into the data at BLS, I believe they would find that there is a sharp drop off in LSAT scores below the median, and those are the student who are having a hard time passing the bar.”

    On November 11, 2014, 3:49 pm, “Jeo” bitch-slapped Nicholas Allard with this remark:

    “How many Brooklyn grads did Patton Boggs hire, Mr. Allard?”

    Nicholas Allard, why don’t you hire a bunch of 2014 Crooklyn grads – several of the ones who passed the bar exam, anyway – at your firm? That would show that you are at least willing to help out some of former students. It would still be a PR move, bitch. But you would be temporarily helping out some struggling JDs from your toilet.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Drake University Law School associate dean Andrea Charlow says she doesn’t agree that the schools are to blame for a decline in scores."

    http://www.radioiowa.com/2014/11/14/number-of-iowans-passing-the-bar-exam-drops/

    ReplyDelete
  26. I wish people understood that even if one were to get out of law school completely debt-free, it would not be worth it - given the life of 90% of the lawyers out there today who practice law. Over the years I have worked as a law clerk, prosecutor, litigation consultant, and associate with small and larger firms. The one constant? The absolutely dishonesty that infects law practice from top to bottom. Clients are often bad, sure, but the worst is found within the legal profession itself, including judges. Thankfully I have had the guts to risk trying some different fields the last few years. Regular, non-lawyer people are as different from attorneys as night is from day. Normal. Ordinary. I love them. Now I am working towards certification in computer networking. The money will probably be about what I would make as a perpetual associate somewhere (I am an extremely good lawyer but terrible snake oil salesman, which is what making the big bucks in law is all about). The great thing is that I will be producing a real product/service for real people and will be able to sleep well at night knowing I am not in a firm where at least half of the partners, if not all, are - in the very literal sense of the word - cheating their clients (and I have seen this consistently, despite firm size, prestige, etc - all that differs in the ways in which they cheat).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is absolutely typical. I do not care how much you get paid. Do you really want to work with these kinds of people?

      http://nypost.com/2014/11/23/911-lawyers-get-down-dirty-in-lawsuits-sex-accusations/

      Delete

 
Web Analytics