Thursday, November 5, 2015

News Flash From Slate: Law School Pigs Are Now Admitting Morons and Imbeciles


http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/10/29/law_schools_are_admitting_too_many_poorly_qualified_students.html

Falling $tandard$: On October 29, 2015, Slate published a Jordan Weissmann piece that was entitled “Desperate Law Schools Are Admitting Too Many Poorly Qualified Students.” Look at the following segment:

“As their application numbers collapsed in recent years, a good number of law schools were forced to choose between their academic standards and their finances. With fewer qualified candidates to go around, some decided to shrink their enrollment numbers and forgo a bit of revenue rather than drastically relax their admission criteria. But many others took the path of least resistance, opening their doors to poorly qualified students willing to pay tuition. 

As a result, a depressing number of law schools are now filled with students who may simply not belong there. According to a new study released this week by the advocacy group Law School Transparency, there were 37 institutions last year where at least half of all new students scored below a 150 on the Law School Admission Test, or LSAT, up from just nine such schools in 2010. Why is that significant? The group argues that students who fail to break the 150 mark face a "serious risk" of eventually failing their state bar exam once they graduate, which would leave them unable to actually practice law. 

To put this in perspective, there are only 203 law schools accredited by the American Bar Association. That means nearly 1 in 5 are now admitting classes that are half made up of at-risk students. At 74 schools, meanwhile, at least a quarter of new students failed to clear a 150 on their LSAT. 

"We are not aware of a time when so many law schools had something like an open enrollment policy," the report states, noting that 4 out of 5 people who applied to law school last year were admitted by at least one. "To a real extent, we're in uncharted territory." 

Under ABA rules, law schools have a responsibility to admit students who stand a chance of one day passing the bar, because the vast majority of states require them to do so in order to become licensed lawyers. The problem is that, while research suggests that students with lower LSAT scores are more likely to fail the bar, there's no real consensus in the legal academy about how low is too low on the entrance exam.” [Emphasis mine]

Imagine if U.S. medical schools admitted applicants with such weak-ass scores on the MCAT. You wouldn’t feel safe to go in for an annual physical, let alone for something more serious. Then again, that is a real profession that cares about its reputation and that of its collective practitioners.

According to this chart from Cambridge LSAT, a result of 150 on the entrance exam would have given one a percentile score of 44.2 – from 2011-2014. Yes, that is super impressive, huh?!?! Of course, the law school swine don’t lose a wink of sleep over their pathetic admi$$ion$ “standards.” These academic thieves are not the least bit concerned that MANY of their grads will be FINANCIALLY CRUSHED, due to their decision to obtain a “legal education.” After all, those JDs can do other things with their TTT degrees, right?!?!

http://abovethelaw.com/2015/11/bar-exam-failure-rates-the-worst-is-yet-to-come/

Other Coverage: Above the Law featured an entry from Kyle McEntee, which was labeled “Bar Exam Failure Rates: The Worst Is Yet to Come” – on November 3, 2015. Check out this portion of his conclusion:

“Roughly speaking, if a school achieved a 75% bar passage rate with a 25th percentile LSAT score in the modest risk band, then we reasonably believe its bar passage rate will decline when its 25th percentile LSAT score drops to the high risk, very high risk, or extreme risk band. 

When contemplating schools with concerning admissions and retention policies, we’re not talking students who have achieved average scores. At least 25% of students at 48 schools in 2014 were in the bottom third of the LSAT distribution. These schools did not mitigate risk with higher undergraduate GPAs or drastically higher attrition. Moreover, we’re dealing with large populations, not individuals. Some people will succeed despite long odds, but the data do not support using tuition from thousands of students to support those success stories, nor to subsidize lower prices for those who are more likely to pass the bar. 

Above the Law has been among the media chorus reporting that 2015 passage rates fell from already-lower 2014 rates. These students started in 2012, before schools made the deepest cuts. The chart below compares schools’ 25th percentile LSAT scores in 2012 (2015 bar exam) and 2014 (2017 bar exam). Black lines indicate a fall from 2012; green lines indicate an increase from 2012. 

In other words, the worst is yet to come.” [Emphasis mine]

“Law professors” love to declare that all lawyers suck at math. However, anyone with an IQ above room temperature can follow this pattern. Look for the law school cockroaches to continue to blame mean state bar examiners for making the exam too difficult for their dumb graduates.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, the law school pigs do not give a single, solitary damn about their students or recent grads. They do not care about their futures, their families, their spouses or their financial well being. They simply don’t give a damn about them! They are only concerned about one thing: exploiting these students’ idealism or desire to make good money in a professional career. The rodents need to get enough idiots to sign on the dotted line and enroll in their diploma mills. Try not to be too stupid, Lemming. You will not be served well by incurring an additional $140K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for a chance to enter a GLUTTED, shrinking “profession.”

29 comments:

  1. With as much information about law schools being the total rip off that they are, it surprises me that people still even want to attend. There's a very, very narrow set of criteria a person interested in attending law school should meet, and Nando has listed it right at the top of his blog:

    DO NOT ATTEND UNLESS:

    (1) YOU GET INTO A TOP 8 LAW SCHOOL ON SCHOLARSHIP;

    (2) YOU GET A FULL-TUITION SCHOLARSHIP TO ATTEND;

    (3) YOU HAVE EMPLOYMENT AS AN ATTORNEY SECURED THROUGH A RELATIVE OR CLOSE FRIEND; OR

    (4) YOU ARE FULLY AWARE BEFOREHAND THAT YOUR HUGE INVESTMENT IN TIME, ENERGY, AND MONEY DOES NOT, IN ANY WAY, GUARANTEE A JOB AS AN ATTORNEY OR IN THE LEGAL INDUSTRY.

    But lemmings gonna lemming. And it's awfully difficult to feel sorry for any sucker who signs up in spite of being provided with so much free advice. All law schools care about is getting that federally backed student loan money from you. For many, it's worse than being signed up for a predatory mortgage, as student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy.

    I sure as hell know that if I had it to do over again, I would have avoided law school like the plague. Please, kids. Do your research before attending. Here's a great resource:

    http://lawlemmings.tumblr.com/research

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't agree with item 2, it can still hurt you pretty bad even if you graduate debt free.

      Otherwise, sound advice.

      Delete
    2. Agree. Since 2008, its been a struggle of 100 dollar court appearances, 40K Schedule C's, no work and tons of rejection letters. And I thought I had an advantage because I have 25 years of trial and litigation experience. All my buddies are in the same boat. The so called UNDER SERVED don't want inexpensive rates, they want FREE!

      Delete
    3. I don't agree with (2). And even (1) is doubtful. As for (4), rare is the lemming who could honestly accept with equanimity being stuck with six figures of non-dischargeable debt at high interest and no way to pay it back.

      Delete
    4. You need to add that prospects should fully understand that the jd will stain their resume and will be an obstacle to finding work in another field if you hate it as so many people do.

      Delete
    5. If you have the connections to succeed in law you have the connections to succeed at anything else. So why not just do something else instead?

      Law makes no sense for anyone anymore. Well, if you are extremely ugly and your connections are only good for law but nothing else, that might be where law makes sense. This is a very limited subset of people however. Most people aren't so hideous that you can't have them do something else, and most people's connections can't possibly only work in law.

      Delete
    6. If you're going in to law and you're not going to a top 10 law school, you're looking at shitlaw, nonlaw or working at Costco.

      If you're set on practicing law (you know, because it's not stressful or tedious or anything), you are looking at shitlaw. And there you've got to be a salesman. If you can do that, why not go into actual sales? If you're the type who can sell an ice cream to an Eskimo (or get a 9 to marry you when you're an average looking schlub with no family money), then you can make it as a salesman. No fucking license to maintain, pressing deadlines or court sanctions. No need to worry that some loser client will report you to the bar for some perceived slight (he didn't return my phone calls) or outright bullshit. There are better and easier ways to make money.

      Delete
  2. This will continue until the last of the Boomers exit the stage. The reasons are at least twofold.

    The Boomers, particularly the front-end, early Boomers, are at the wheel of these "institutions of higher learning" and it is obviously in their best interests to keep the Scam running. They have huge mortgages, cottages, boats, etc. and someone's gotta pay for all that. Thank goodness for federal guaranteed student loan money!

    Then there are the non-higher-education-employed Boomer parents. For them, "higher education" always worked. It was always a good investment. Again, this applies most acutely to the early Boomer segment: they went to State U. in 1970, got their English B.A. and had a white-collar job for forty years or so. They cannot imagine a world where at least a bachelor's in SOMETHING doesn't pay off. After all, a summer job will take care of the tuition, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait! I have to study nursing, or accounting, or engineering to get a job. But I hate sick people, the tax code, and math. Life's not fair. I deserve big bucks for my sociology degree

      Delete
  3. Simple numbers speak volumes. In Illinois, there are 92,000 registered lawyers and 95,954 people employed by automobile dealerships. Nearly every Illinois adult owns a car or two and will purchase several over their lifetimes. All of those motor vehicle will need to be repaired and serviced from time to time. How many Illinois adults will need a lawyer and how often during their lifetimes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "A Will a day is all we ask-and you get a free can of almonds."

      Delete
  4. Letting in morons with 150 LSATs shows these cocksuckers only care about their cushy professor jobs. 'Nuff said.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Over on the law dean's blog, Dean David Yellen admits that there was a law school scam. "there was a time when a number of law schools used employment data in a way that was morally, if not legally, fraudulent."

    ReplyDelete
  6. In NY, you can sit for the bar with only one year of law school completed. So people should think about doing the one year, and pick up the BarBri prep to pass the bar. Not sure how far you can go with a NY license to practice law and not the associated degree.

    Heck, in California, you can even sit for the bar w/o law school -reading the law- (Bar Bri prep to cover the needed subjects). We need to embrace these nontraditional paths. If only the legal community embraced change and not prestige so much.

    And in another state they did away with the bar all together, and all you have to do is graduate with a law degree and you can practice within the state.(ABOLISH the BAR EXAM)

    Someone needs to re-evaluate the system, and create two tiers (like in the UK).... and for god's sake... bring back the LLB....... Reform with standardized / different pathways to a legal education is the only way stabilize things. (example... for criminal law, 60% of law school is useless).

    ReplyDelete
  7. You could learn all the shit you need from Barbri prep and put all the doctrinal classes on audio discs. Or for free on youtube. No need to pay useless shitbags $170K to rehash a bunch of garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 7:53am posted the same drivel,verbatim, last week. It's utter nonsense. First, the LLB and the JD are the same degree/same years of study-it just got changed b/c it sounds better.
    Second, all two tiers would do, as suggested above, is create even more of a bi-modal system of pay, if anything. Further, it's a thinly disguised suggestion to crank out more lawyers in a shorter period of time. Pray tell, 7:53, which scam school do you work for?

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/the-wrong-people-have-stopped-applying-to-law-school/255685/

    Back on April 10, 2012, the Atlantic featured a Jordan Weissmann piece that was entitled “The Wrong People Have Stopped Applying to Law School.” Check out this beautiful opening:

    “Among the many unfortunate developments in higher education over the past decade, one of the most talked about has been the law school bubble. In the heat of the recession, a record number of students decided that it would be a good idea to dive six-figures into debt for a shot at a legal career. Many were lured with utterly misleading job placement stats, as well as a stubborn misperception that law was still a safe career choice, that a J.D. even guaranteed a living wage. Once they graduated, many realized otherwise.

    Last month, the Law School Admissions Council (a.k.a., LSAC) published data indicating that the bubble finally seemed to have popped -- a merciful development, as I put it at the time. The number of LSAT tests administered has plummeted over the past two years, and fewer students are accepting admission. This is a happy turn of events. The fewer grads being funneled into an super-saturated industry, the better. (Full disclosure: I used to work for a law firm.)

    Yesterday, LSAC released a new bit of evidence that law school has finally lost its luster. Applicants are down more than 15 percent for the year. But there's one problem: The wrong students have stopped applying.

    Take a look at the chart below, which shows the number of applications from prospective students in each LSAT range for 2012. Here's the take away: The number of students applying who probably have no business going to law school has dropped the least. The number of students applying who probably should be going to law school has dropped the most.”

    Of course, the cockroaches were not going to leave federal student loan money on the table. This is why the current $y$tem is so pernicious: as long as loans are extended to anyone with a pulse and the ability to get admitted to any type of academic program, the pigs are actually encourage to enroll morons. Hell, it would actually cost the rats at the lower-ranked diploma mills money, if they maintained decent admi$$ion $tandard$.

    This development of lowering bar exam passage rates across the country is not news to those who saw these stories a few years ago. After all, morons and waterheads are enrolled in law school for three putrid years. The effects on the bar exam will not be seen for several years. The law school pigs are counting on people to forget this fact, so that they can place the blame on those who administer the test. It is MUCH easier to point to bar examiners – and to claim that they are unnecessarily making the entrance exam too difficult – than it is to maintain halfway decent admi$$ion$ “standards” or to train mental midgets to pass the bar exam.

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/12/endgame.html

    Paul Campos documented the drop in admi$$ion$ “standards” at ABA-accredited toilets, back on December 14, 2012 – in an entry labeled “Endgame.” In the last analysis, he ripped the pigs to shreds – with the facts, stellar logic, and justified anger. Take a look for yourself:

    “What are the economic implications for law schools of an admissions cycle that ends up attracting only 53,000 applicants? To answer this question, we have to estimate how many matriculants such a cycle is likely to yield. This is a function of two factors: how many applicants end up getting admitted to at least one school to which they apply, and how many admitted applicants actually end up enrolling.

    As to the first factor, the percentage of applicants being admitted to at least one school has been rising for several years now:

    2004: 55.6%
    2005: 58.6%
    2006: 63.1%
    2007: 66.1%
    2008: 66.5%
    2009: 67.4%
    2010: 68.7%
    2011: 71.1%

    In other words, law school applicants were 27.9% more likely to be admitted to at least one school in 2011 than they had been seven years earlier. We don’t have numbers yet for how many 2012 applicants were admitted to at least one school, but since the number of applicants fell by 13.7%, while the number of new 1Ls fell by only 8.6%, it seems certain that the upward trend in percentage of applicants admitted continued.”

    Read further to see how the bitches and hags have continued to admit a higher percentage of applicants, even as the quality of those men and women has gone down. These supposed “legal educators” are the scum of the earth. They are not “scholars,” but thieves who seek to get as many asses in seats as possible. The jackals do not teach anything practical, and they do not give a damn what happens to their students upon graduation. Furthermore, the swine know that the "profession" is GLUTTED and that there are far too many JDs for the available number of attorney openings each year. Yet, they continue to admit and enroll lemmings at sickening levels.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2015/08/has-the-decline-in-law-school-applications-bottomed-out

    Fast forward to August 30, 2015. On that date, Campos provided updated information on climbing acceptance rates. His LGM piece was entitled “Has the decline in law school application bottomed out?” Take a look at this portion of his article:

    “Here’s the percentage of applicants admitted to at least one ABA school over the past ten years:

    2004: 55.6%
    2005: 58.6%
    2006: 63.1%
    2007: 66.1%
    2008: 66.5%
    2009: 67.4%
    2010: 68.7%
    2011: 71.1%
    2012: 74.5%
    2013: 76.8%
    2014: 79.8%”

    In sum, law school applicants were 43.5% more likely to be admitted to at least one school in 2014 than they had been 10 years earlier. Keep in mind that not all applicants are equal in quality or intelligence. As the Weissmann piece on April 10, 2012 in the Atlantic, those with higher LSAT scores were avoiding law school – while those with pathetic results kept applying and enrolling. And yet, the acceptance rates continue to rise!

    The law school pigs are pieces of trash, and ANYONE who defends these sick bitches is a shill, a pathological liar, an ignoramus, or on their payroll. These “educators” do not care what happens to their graduates or to their families. After all, these young men and women are merely a mean$ to an end, i.e. a big-ass paycheck courtesy of the federal taxpayer, for “working” 4-6 hours per week.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The photo at the top tells the whole story-the scam will never die. Why? Because every year there are thousands upon thousands of new college grads blessed with an essentially worthless BA in history/pol sci/English/journalism/theology, etc. They can't get jobs in any sort of industry because the history department at Microsoft is pretty small, they can't teach b/c they don't have a teaching certificate-really, all they've got is the diploma and debt. So maybe they can get a job in retail, $10/hour no benefits. So what's the loss in going to law school? They've already got debt they aren't going to repay, so why not double down and take on $150+K more? Maybe, just maybe, they'll get one of those 160K biglaw jobs they've heard so much about, or will end up saving the whales. No matter what, it's better than telling people that they graduated from college and all they could find was a job at the GAP. With the massive funds available, a law student can live Ok for three years; beats making barely minimum wage and living in their parent's basement. And yes it all ends in three years, but these are Americans we're talking about-who the hell thinks three years in advance, or even considers the repercussions of taking on lots of debt?
    No, the scam will continue for years; the pipeline of people who want to attend law school b/c they "like to argue" is limitless, particularly with the new open admissions policies-and if you've got nothing better to do, why not avoid facing reality for three years on the taxpayers' dime? The only thing that will cause even a pause in this will be for some law schools to close-and that hasn't happened. Even Indiana Tech and Charleston are still open-and earlier this year both were on a death watch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indiana Tech and Charleston are still on a death watch. Consider them both mortally wounded.

      Degrees in history and such are not the only ones that are worthless: even degrees in technical fields don't necessarily lead anywhere these days.

      Delete
    2. A good undergrad mentor should redirect these students into an MBA or finance program. Twenty nine years ago I had a full ride in Urban Planning. I chose law instead because it was a broader degree. What a mistake. I didn't have the information that is available today. I recall talking to my then law Dean who was then recruiting me that "law is great training for anything" but that you are locked into Urban Planning. I wish I had Nando and the internets in 1986.

      Delete
    3. OG-I hope you're right, but with the # of LSAT takers ticking up again, and with Charleston seemingly getting ready to close only a few months ago, it's now made a comeback and is accepting applications from new pigeons(tuition and estimated living costs? A cool $62,000/year, per Charleston's estimate-and if you want to see some really frightening numbers, take a look at their Class of 2018 profile). A true bellwether will be if IT stays open and gets accreditation. Again, I hope you are correct, but it appears these schools just can't be closed.
      and 5:45-years ago, an MBA was a good bet-now it's as big a scam as the JD. Years ago, it was a degree only offered by an elite few-now every college in the country offers it-hell, I think U of Phoenix offers several variations. Now, just like law school, either go to a very top school, or you've wasted your money.

      Delete
    4. Well, closures have already happened, albeit in disguise: Cooley has closed a campus, and Hamline effectively shut down by "merging" with Mitchell. Expect more closures to follow.

      Indiana Tech can't run forever at zero tuition. Accreditation would improve its standing, but tuition would lower it. How many of this year's 1Ls would drop out if Indiana Tech announced that next year wouldn't be free?

      Maybe I'm just dreaming, but I don't see how some toilets can survive much longer. Mind you, I don't expect 150 toilets to shut up shop; that should happen but won't.

      Back in the 1980s, everyone and her mother-fucking pet gerbil was getting an MBA. Unfortunately, that fad has come back.

      Delete
  13. Law school is a sucker's bet. If you're over 27, don't go to law school anywhere. Biglaw wants young minds. From T14 schools. One of my friends went to UVa and he was 27 or 28 after first year and didn't get shit. Top 1/4 of his class too.

    If you're a non-trad, you're only real option in law is shitlaw. Where you'll be representing poor people and criminal scum. The phone will keep ringing and a complaint even a groundless one will cause you sleepless nights. No sleep, little pay, constant stress over getting new clients, etc. All that shit is what causes 35 year old lawyers to look 50 with bad posture, bags under the eyes, thinning hair and all the rest. Fuck this profession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, and these people just won't respect you either, because they know full well your service is oversaturated.

      The government clearly doesn't think legal representation is important either. Otherwise they would pay for it. Why is it the government has no problem footing the bill for healthcare, or law schools, or countless other things, but won't spring for legal services? THAT, they expect people to work for free to provide. Suddenly now it's capitalism, the private sector can sort it out without government subsidies.

      Everything else, they'll send money to. Even foreign nations, they'll spend on. Healthcare they spent on, then turned around and demanded everyone have health insurance on top of that. But legal services? LOL. They'll spend a few cents on prosecution, spend way more on law enforcement, and just bribe the judges and call it a day.

      Delete
    2. After finishing law school in my mid-forties, I finally found work in law, and good work at that. BUT I fully agree that people past their late twenties should stay the hell out of law school. I barely made it, despite an uncommonly good résumé (praised just this evening by one of the most senior judges in my jurisdiction). Earlier this year I was thinking of throwing in the towel and becoming a truck driver. Even the dean of my law school advised me to give up on becoming a lawyer, as he believed that I would not find work. I couldn't get an interview, still less a job.

      Old guys, stay out of law school. And old gals, that goes doubly for you, as you'll face the additional obstacle of sexism.

      For this purpose, consider yourself old if you have passed your 28th birthday—29th at the outside.

      You have been warned.

      Delete

 
Web Analytics