Thursday, November 19, 2015

Strong Correlation: Southern Illinois University Sewer of Law Sees a Drop in Bar Passage Rate, After the Pigs Admitted More Imbeciles


http://abovethelaw.com/2015/11/one-law-schools-change-in-fortune/

Take Note, “Legal Educators”: On November 17, 2015, ATL published a Kyle McEntee piece that was labeled “One Law School’s Change in Fortune.” He uses a professional tone, while he rips the commode to shreds:

“The New York Times chose to highlight Southern Illinois University when it reported on our investigation late last month. I objected to the focus on SIU because it had relatively affordable tuition, above-average job rates, and a very high bar passage rate in 2013. With many more egregious examples to choose from, I didn’t think SIU merited special attention. Still, July 2015 bar exam outcomes drive home why SIU found its way into our report in the first place, and why high bar pass rates from even a couple of years ago can be very deceiving to prospective students. It also demonstrates that even respectable state schools are not immune to the pressures that have driven so many law schools to admit far too many at-risk students. 

Between 2010 and 2014, as with many law schools, the school’s admissions profile changed drastically. The school earned an “extreme risk” label for its 2014 entering class based on a bottom quartile LSAT score of 144 (22.9 percentile). The chart below plots SIU’s LSAT numbers for each of the last five entering classes for which we have data. The 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile LSAT scores are plotted on top of the national LSAT distribution curve. From this you can see that the school’s 75th percentile in 2014 was its 25th percentile in 2010. 

In other words, SIU’s weakest students five years ago would now be at or near the top of SIU’s talent pool.” [Emphasis mine]

What could possibly go wrong with this $TTTraTTTegy?!?!

“SIU had strong job outcomes at a relatively affordable price for in-state students starting in 2010 and 2011. Overall, those entering classes only lost 2-3% of students to involuntary academic attrition. In July 2013 and July 2014, the remaining students achieved a first-time July passage rate of 91.3% and 86.7% in Illinois, respectively. 

However, the story starts to change with the class enrolled in 2012. First, the school’s risk profile at each quartile increased by one level. The 25th percentile went from modest to high; 50th percentile from low to modest; and the 75th percentile from minimal to low. Second, involuntary academic attrition increased to 6.3%. 

Despite increased attrition, the school’s July 2015 bar passage rate was 67% in Illinois. This is likely just the beginning of the downward trend for SIU.

For the entering class in 2013 (July 2016 bar exam), SIU’s LSAT scores continued to drop across the board, moving from the top of the band to the bottom of the band at each of the three quartiles. Oddly, the school failed out a quarter as many 1Ls from this class as compared to the previous class. 

In 2014 each quartile increased at least one additional risk level. The bottom quartile went from high risk to extreme risk. Whether the school failed students out at a higher or lower rate is not yet known.” [Emphasis mine]

Seriously, who the hell could have seen that admitting dunces would subsequently lead to lower bar passage rates?!?! Simply put, garbage in equals garbage out. If you admit waterheads with weak-ass academic credentials and poor LSAT scores, these dolts are not suddenly going to become brilliant minds – especially when they are enrolled in a THIRD TIER COMMODE. Yes, according to US “News” & World Report, $ouTTThern Illinoi$ Univer$iTTTy Sewer of Law is rated as the co-149th greatest, most mesmerizing and fantastic law school in the entire damn country! What an impressive achievement, huh?!?!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/business/dealbook/study-cites-lower-standards-in-law-school-admissions.html?_r=0

Prior Coverage of the Toilet: The New York Times featured an Elizabeth Olson article entitled “Study Cites Lower Standards in Law School Admissions” – on October 26, 2015. Check out the following portion:

“The steady erosion in admissions scores between 2010 and 2014, Mr. McEntee, said in his study, is “directly linked to the falling bar exam passage rates in many states.” 

One school the study deems as having too many students at high risk is Southern Illinois University School of Law, in Carbondale, Ill. The school, which largely draws its students from Kentucky and Missouri, as well as Illinois, slimmed down its class size to 121 students, from 144 students in 2010. In the last five years, its median law school admissions test score also dropped — to 149 from 153, according to figures it provided to accreditors.

“Our experience has been that someone with a 147 score could pass the bar and someone else with 160 could fail, so we don’t think that there is necessarily a relationship between the test and people’s ability to pass the bar,” said Christopher Behan, the school’s associate dean. 

Since 2010, Southern Illinois’s bar passage rate also fell 5 percentage points, to 85.54 percent, according to the school’s figures. To help students pass the bar, the school offers a free summer bar preparation course as well as a separate course in the spring. It also added another bar preparation course during the current fall semester.” [Emphasis mine]

Pig Behan will do and say anything, in order to keep the gravy train rolling along. He is no different from associate deans at other diploma mills. None of them have any integrity. If the cesspool starts admitting dummies with 143 LSAT scores, he will state that these men and women are going to be extra motivated to crush the bar exam.

Conclusion: In a just world, student loans would not be extended to idiots majoring in Film Studies or Political “Science” – or to morons who cannot exceed 150 on the damn LSAT. Then again, the entire “higher education” indu$try is dependent on this financing scheme. Don’t expect the parasites to increase their admissions standards, either. The swine will not leave student loan dollars on the table.

38 comments:

  1. While I'm certainly a dunce for going to law school in the first place, I was a "respectable" middle-of-the-road candidate back in 2002. Even got a small, merit-based scholarship (although "section-stacking" has a whole new meaning to me, in retrospect).

    Fast forward to today, and I would be treated like a f**king KING with the same credentials. The way things have gone is absolutely absurd, divorced from the market and reality, and...wholly necessary to shake out the dead-wood hackademics and administrators.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hell, people who as recently as five years ago would not have gotten into law school at all are being treated like fucking kings. They can even get "merit"-based "scholarships".

      Scamsters perfume their shitty enterprise by reference to "opportunity" for traditionally excluded groups (such as worthies with LSAT scores far below 140). Don't believe their lies. They'll take damn near anyone who qualifies for unlimited student loans.

      Delete
  2. “Our experience has been that someone with a 147 score could pass the bar and someone else with 160 could fail, so we don’t think that there is necessarily a relationship between the test and people’s ability to pass the bar,” said Christopher Behan, the school’s associate dean.

    JHC, anyone can pick one datum point and show an unexpected result. That is why we have this well-vetted field called STATISTICS, that looks at the characteristics of groups and trends, and can make accurate predictions in the aggregate.

    Dishonesty like this, from "ethical" legal "educators," is why the whole thing needs to burn down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. The issue is not what is possible but what is probable.

      "… so we don't think that there is necessarily a relationship": Bullshit. If you really meant that, Behan, you're a mother-fucking moron.

      Delete
    2. Yup - totally absurd. Like an NFL GM saying: "our experience has been that an 8th round draft pick can end up as a starter while a first round pick can be a bust, therefore there is no difference between a first round pick and an eight round pick."

      Delete
  3. Come on guys. The lawyer with a 142 lsat vs the lawyer with a 160 lsat. Which one will be the better lawyer ? Assuming they both pass the bar, the one with the most hustle will prosper. (there are plenty of high lsat scoring
    law grads that eventually pass the bar and get disbarred for one reason or another).

    There is no shame in having a low lsat. Even with the law degree, its all about on the job training. There are plenty of lawyers who passed the bar with high lsat's that do not have a clue how to practice. It all comes down to the hustle!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Problem is, many attorneys never have a real chance to practice. In terms of choosing the lucky few that have a nontrivial legal career, the school you go to (and by extension LSAT) is critically important. Hustle matters too.

      Delete
    2. The degree to which the legal profession has been utterly diminished- and that is the operable word, "diminished"- cannot be more adequately demonstrated than by the above comment.

      The only thing that irritates me more than the scammers is idiocy surrounding the concept of "hustle." I fucking laugh whenever I hear that. I laugh because the term conveys that what really matters in law is not the ability to recall the law, analyze the law, conduct a trial, prepare a brief, etc, rather it's the ability to obtain clients, usually by applying sales tactics that have nothing to do with the actual abilities associated with lawyering. And the harsh truth is that the profession has been so utterly diluted, and is so devoid of any standard, That that is all that matters.

      The attorneys that will make it will indeed have "hustle," and this will come at great expense to their clients. The most successful lawyer I know runs a personal injury practice and he regularly brags that he has no knowledge of the law, and did abysmally in law school. Nevertheless, his old man gave him 500k upon graduating from law school, and he "obtains" business by "persuading" local medical practitioners to send him cases. He also knows how to appear to be what the general public perceives a good lawyer to be, and he has all the trappings of success: car, house, etc. Practioners have seen this guy fuck up so many cases and in such a horrendous way, but it doesn't matter. Pure and simple. His clients don't know he doesn't know what he is doing, and it doesn't matter because he has an endless supply of capital floating the operation at this point.

      This guy is responsible for people getting deported, convicted of serious crimes, and other serious shit; but it doesn't matter because his clients many times don't know he doesn't know what he is doing, and even if they did, they don't have the resources to do anything about it. He loves to hire competent attorneys to work for him, and overwork and underpay them; and he laughs in their faces while doing it.

      He is a hustler, but if this what this profession has become, then even this guy got scammed. He could have opened up a used car dealership and behaved the same way, made more money, and hurt a lot less people.

      If someone doesn't come from poverty and they can't crack a 150 on the LSAT it means that they don't give a shit or don't have the brains to truly service their clients. If this is the direction we are going, we should get rid of law schools and everyone should be able to practice law. At least in that instance, the public will have a better shot at understanding what is going on.

      I shudder to think what medicine is going to look at in a few years because the powers to be want to take that down now so the proles can get more free shit.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Dean Behan for your insight.

      Delete
    4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeUfDTn5huM

      'Do the hustle!'

      Get the fuck outta here.

      Delete
    5. Most of the students to whom I taught courses on the LSAT would notice the unjustified shift from "the better lawyer" to "will prosper". The argument, such as it is, relies on the unwarranted assumption that a lawyer who prospers is a superior lawyer.

      Delete
    6. Have to disagree with 9:12. People with LSAT scores below 160 have no business in any law school. Sure these folks can handle routine document review or cut and paste wills, DUI, etc. But these ministerial tasks can easily be performed with someone having 4 months paralegal training. Real attorneys need to be able to think on their feet.

      Delete
    7. LOL at "the hustle". I highly suspect from observation of fellow graduates who went solo that a successful "hustler" also has a LOT of Daddy Money. Especially in law. People, this is an image profession. Your clients care about whether or not you look "successful", usually defined as "sleek and well-off." If you plan to graduate as a typical, six-figure-debt schlep with no law firm job, how the fuck do you intend to rent a posh office, afford a nice car, and dress well? And the people who could afford to get those things after law school? Gee Golly Wally, how do you think they afforded that? Must be all that part-time pizza delivery work!

      Christ, I'm a mason, but clients aren't angry or disappointed if I'm wearing beat up clothes. Hell, lots of clients like the idea of a working owner (No disconnect between the sales side and the installation side of the business). But working as a lawyer? You show up in a mangy J.C. Penney's suit and driving a moldering Ford Focus? Fuck you, that client isn't going to give you the time of day.

      Delete
    8. "The Hustle" is the biggest lie perpetuated by law school apologists-why don't they just call it Legal Darwinism? Like the old Paper Chase scenario..".Congratulations you've just passed the bar; shake hands with the person on your left and on your right, because in 12 months one of you will no longer be practicing law. Now get out there and do the Solo Hustle! And remember, it's survival of the fittest."
      The fact that 9:12 and dolts like him perpetuate this shows what a rotten "profession" law has become. Can you imagine-even if for only a minute-anyone giving that advice to a physician?

      Delete
    9. It's not abou diagnosing patients or performing surgery. That's what a lot of these high MCAT scoring egg head med students don't understand. You don't need a high MCAT score to be a successful doctor. It's about going out there and hustling to get patients. You have to give the patient what he wants. You have to be personable and approachable, like commissioned sales, lol.

      What a fucking joke profession this has become. An anecdote that really solidifies the matter for me has to do with an ethics case in Texas. Basically, there is a guy down there who is incredible at getting dismalls for DUI and DWI cases. He tried to advertise himself as the King of DWIs or some shit like that. Anyway, it was factually true that the dude had the best record for DUIs and DWI acquittals in his region. The ethics panel would not approve his advertisement, and he tape recorded the ethics guys, who said something that is substantively equivalent to "someone may want something other than a good result." The guy went back and forth with him arguing what else you could possible want in a situation like that other than getting the case dismissed, and the ethics guy kept saying that's not all that matters, people might want "something else" or some shit. HAHAHAHAHAHA, think about what a fucking absurd joke this profession has become based on this exchange alone. 1) the fact that a decent trial lawyer has to contemplate adversitising like that is ridiculous and 2) the fact the the ethics panelist, the fucking ethics panelist, told him it didn't matter that he gets the best results illustrates that this profession has been thrown in the toilet. This is the whole point of professional licensing: that you are forced to hire from a pool of competent people with the knowledge and skills to handle the substance of your problem. It's not supposed to matter if the guy is polished or he speaks nicely or he can sell a fucking car, all that is supposed to matter is he does his fucking job, which in this case he was as evinced by his record of success. But you know, lol, someone might be looking for something else, and that's why there are so many unsatisifed clients out there. They go for the something else and get fucked; and that's why we are seeing these idiotic comments about hustle.

      This isn't a profession anymore. It's sole function is to serve the academy and provide egotistical satisfaction for the children of the top one percent (I think a law school dean basically conceded as much for his school at one point).

      Delete
    10. Don't attack the poster at 9:12! He didn't say anything that isn't true.

      These days, unless you make biglaw, you do need to "hustle" in order to survive as a lawyer. It absolutely does diminish the profession, but that's just the way it is. Law schools have pumped out too many graduates, and these law school graduates need to make a living somehow. Thus, we have the current situation. Out of necessity and desperation law school graduates began to "scam" money from people and insurance companies, and law schools and the ABA should have anticipated this.

      In my 10+ years of practice, I've dealt with all sorts of scams. Most recently, I've advised defendants in "copyright troll" cases, which are the lowest of the low as far as I'm concerned. Not only have I become disgusted with the venal lawyers who represent the plaintiffs/trolls, but I have become sick with the shameful judges that help perpetuate this scam---evidently, judges are looking to feather their own nest (so much for being "honorable").

      Also, regarding the LSAT, nobody cares about your LSAT score once you pass the bar. It becomes completely irrelevant.

      Delete
    11. I think that anyone who has worked shitlaw knows a thing or two about "hustle." It's all about getting prospects in the door and laying down something very much akin to high pressure sales tactics. Deceptive advertising and fine print in retainer agreements are the lifeblood of shitlawyering. And given that no one wants to pay for a shitlawyer's services anyway, it has all come down to who's going to beat who out of whatever money can be made out of whatever shitclaim can be made.

      It's such a wonderful "profession."

      Delete
    12. First, none of this applies, at all, to the medical profession. Each and every physician has more patients knocking down the door than s/he needs. It's all about supply and demand, and the demand far outstrips the supply.
      https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/426166/20150303.html
      Regarding the Hustle nonsense: it's all supply and demand, too. There are way to many lawyers and way too many lawyers who are willing to take next to nothing because of it. So you can hustle and hustle and hustle and still end up with nothing-there are just way to many choices. Keep in mind that this is the age of the $500 DUI, with that same lawyer never purchasing malpractice insurance-or any insurance of any type at all-because he can't afford it(after three years or so, the rates start skyrocketing). And s/he shares an office with 4 or 5 other desperate solos, with one receptionist(maybe) and shared expenses for conference rooms and copying costs and etc etc. So 9:12 is a dolt, as many of the current desperate solos were lured to law school with false employment stats provided by-drumroll please-the schools themselves. Even now, with the ABA getting minimally involved, the jobs stats are still gamed by the law schools, listing "permanent" part time jobs and temporary jobs in their job stats. Every hear of a "DDS Preferred" job? You'll notice that medical/dental/nursing schools aren't required to post job stats b/c they're actual professions.
      The Hustle is a bad joke-it's a buyer's market, and the painful secret is that the buyer's-the potential clients-don't want to pay anything for legal services and are more than willing to shop and negotiate to get the best rate. And after you've done the $500 DUI trial, they're also more than happy to grieve you.

      Delete
    13. "And s/he shares an office with 4 or 5 other desperate solos, with one receptionist(maybe) and shared expenses for conference rooms and copying costs and etc etc."

      Sometimes its a virtual office, where you rent a mailbox and can sometimes rent a conference room. And they try to pass themselves off as a boutique firm.

      Delete
  4. There are 9 law schools in Illinois all pumping out nearly 1500 to 2000 newbies. All of this in a state that is loosing 100,000 people per year. There is absolutely no need for tax payer subsidized SIU, NIU, and U of I law schools. SIU and NIU are unranked and U of I was involved in a "rankings" scandal and was sanctioned by the ABA. There are 92,000 registered lawyers in Illinois. My unemployed lawyer buddy, out over 30 years, was in tears last night because he has applied to numerous law jobs without even a lousy email or letter. He is not alone in Illinois.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What's with the term "involuntary academic attrition"? Call it what it is: FLUNKING OUT.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The law schools are going to need a trisomy 21 student union pretty soon.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So by looking at LST, Touro the backed-up, overflowing, shit stained TTTToilet's class of 2015 stats are as follows:

    25%-146
    50%-148
    75%-150

    Today, the school can proudly declare that they had a 52.5% bar passage rate for July 2015. And this sewer just keeps lowering their standards to put asses in seats.

    Lowering standards and raising tuition is a recipe for disaster, and I can see this screwing the entire profession in the next 10-20 years.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The solution to this problem would be so easy if law school hadn't turned itself into a scam.
    The most sensible rule

    No body who has scored less than 164 on the LSAT may enroll into a program that is supposed to grant someone a law degree. 164 and above is the top 10% of LSAT takers and we know how important being in the top 10% is for success as a lawyer. The bar has to be set somewhere. 170 might be too high 150 which is what the chart at the top seems to be recommending is probably too low.
    Schools may teach classes to people who score less than 164, but they may not charge nor may they issue degrees to such people.

    Such a rule would bankrupt about 150 law schools, but most of those places didn't have any reason to exist anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Which law school is a bigger piece of fucking shit? Touro or SIU?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Touro is the biggest piece of shit in New York hands down, which places it high in the running for biggest piece of shit in the United States and possibly the world.

      Delete
  10. http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog/2015/11/new-york-times-carbondale-law-school-admits-many.html

    On November 3, 2015, the St. Louis Business Journal picked up on this development, in a story from reported Greg Edwards. The piece was labeled “New York Times: Carbondale law school admits many who don’t make the grade.” Here is the full text of that coverage:

    “Southern Illinois University School of Law was among the law schools cited by The New York Times in a recent article about lower standards in law school admissions.

    “As law schools across the country try to keep their classrooms full, many are admitting students with lesser qualifications, including those with a lower admissions test score — considered an important predictor of whether a graduate will earn the credentials to practice law,” the paper wrote. “Scores below 150 are viewed by many as warnings that test takers lack the skills necessary to practice law.”

    The Southern Illinois University law school, located in Carbondale, has a median LSAT score of 149 and too many students at high risk of being unable to pass a bar exam, according to a study by Kyle McEntee, executive director of Law School Transparency. He said 45 schools admitted seriously at-risk students last year, up from eight in 2010.

    “Our experience has been that someone with a 147 score could pass the bar and someone else with 160 could fail, so we don’t think that there is necessarily a relationship between the test and people’s ability to pass the bar,” Christopher Behan, the SIU law school’s associate dean, told the Times. In the last five years, Southern Illinois’s bar passage rate fell 5 percentage points, to 85.54 percent, according to the school’s figures.

    Law student debt is rising, with an average of $118,670 in 2014, plus interest, the Times reported.”

    It’s nice when these smaller, regional news sources report what the major papers say about the law school scam. This should reinforce – to local businessmen and Boomers – that the law school in their area is a steaming pile of excrement. Those are the types who read this type of coverage.

    As an added benefit, it will also help magnify the message – and give them a point of reference, when their nephew or grandson tells them that there are too many damn law schools and nowhere near enough attorney jobs available to graduates. I'm sure the dinosaurs will still refer to ALL younger people today as “lazy bastards who want everything handed to them.” However, it shows these old farts that the law schools are run and operated by selfish pigs.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Get this, some politicians and lawyers are considering a 10th law school in Illinois in Peoria to be associated with Bradley University. It just never ends. The folks who want this are fully employed, very very connected into networks and are never wanting for work or business. They are too busy!!! They will never throw us dumb putz Solos any work. And that boys, is the majority of lawyers, us putzs who drive 96 LaSabres.. If you are not from Peoria or Pekin, or have a family name, you are toast.

    ReplyDelete
  12. http://www.chicagolawbulletin.com/Archives/2015/10/30/law-schools-lsat-10-30-15.aspx

    The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin published a piece from staff writer Roy Strom, which was headlined “Report: 74 law schools labeled a ‘serious risk’” – on October 30, 2015. Look at the following meaty portion:

    "Schools admitted 78.1 percent of applicants during the 2013-2014 admission cycle, more than 40 percent higher than the rate a decade ago, the report says.

    That is despite the fact that the applicant pool has lost a disproportionate number of its strongest candidates. The number of applicants in the top 20 percent of LSAT-takers declined at more than 2½ times the rate of the bottom 20 percent.

    “Law school has become less attractive to everyone, and those who are the highest achieving have the best alternative options,” he said.

    The report’s data show the recession has had a similar effect on all Illinois law schools. Their incoming students’ LSAT scores have fallen. The report focuses on the 25th percentile of LSAT scores among admitted students.

    Southern Illinois University’s law school, for instance, experienced a six-point drop, from 151 to 144, in its 25th percentile of LSAT takers from 2010 to 2014. DePaul University fell from 156 to 148. John Marshall fell from 151 to 146. And Northern Illinois University fell from 150 to 146.”

    It has CLEARLY been established that law school pigs at ABA-accredited toilets have KNOWINGLY and WILLINGLY admitted higher percentages of applicants, every year for a decade now. This has been done, in spite of the fact that smarter college grads have avoided law school at a much higher rate than the morons with low LSAT scores. Yes, these “legal educators” truly care about their students’ interests, right?!?!

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

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

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "And s/he shares an office with 4 or 5 other desperate solos, with one receptionist(maybe) and shared expenses for conference rooms and copying costs and etc etc."

      Sometimes its a virtual office, where you rent a mailbox and can sometimes rent a conference room. And they try to pass themselves off as a boutique firm.

      Delete
  13. As you can see, the drop in admi$$ion$ “standards” is not limited to putrid dung heaps. Higher ranked diploma mills have engaged in the same conduct. The Strom article then continued:

    “University of Chicago Law School fell from 168 to 166. Northwestern Pritzker School of Law fell from 166 to 162. University of Illinois College of Law fell from 163 to 158. Loyola University Chicago School of Law fell from 157 to 155. IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law fell from 155 to 152.

    Jennifer L. Rosato Perea, DePaul’s law dean, said the report’s use of the label “serious risk school,” which is determined by LSAT scores, was unhelpful for students.

    “We don’t rely at DePaul, or any law school, on just the LSAT,” she said. “There are a lot of other predictors and factors that we look at that are indicators of success for either law school or the bar.”

    Drops in LSAT scores have not yet resulted in anything near a crisis in bar pass rates in Illinois. The report says the 2013 composite bar pass rate for Illinois’ nine law schools was 90 percent. The national figure was 83 percent.

    To link LSAT scores with bar pass rates, Law School Transparency’s report cites a study published by the LSAC in 1998 that showed the LSAT and law school grade-point average were the strongest predictors of bar passage for students who graduated in 1994.

    Wendy Margolis, director of communications at LSAC, said the organization does not make any claims that the LSAT is a predictive tool for bar pass rates.

    “We don’t find it applicable to really anything,” Margolis said of the 1998 study. “We’re surprised all of a sudden to see it quoted all over the place.”

    Christopher W. Behan, associate dean at SIU’s law school, said law school curricula has changed and bar exam training has improved since he graduated law school in 1995 — near the time the study took place. He also noted the scoring of the LSAT was different.

    “That was a different era in law schools,” Behan said. “It was a sink-or-swim environment.”

    While the effect of admitting lower-credentialed students may still be unknown, there is no question that the profile of law students has changed in recent years."

    ChrisTTTopher Behan is a prime example of slime in legal academia. The cockroach will do and say anything – in order to justify lower standards and keep the gravy train rolling along. Why would anyone with a brain stem even want to attend a supposed “professional school” that is run by such lying rats? No one is going to be impressed with your THIRD TIER “education” or law degree, when your garbageman cousin – armed with a high school diploma and union protection – is making double your salary, Bitch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “We don’t rely at DePaul, or any law school, on just the LSAT,” she said. “There are a lot of other predictors and factors that we look at that are indicators of success for either law school or the bar.”

      DePaul is a shithole here in Chicago. Isn't that where the cunt Kimber Russell went to law school? So what else do these idiots consider? If the applicant is into finger paintings? If they like long walks on the beach? If they can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time? Fuck this place.

      Delete
  14. The problem is that if you Google lawyer salary and job prospects, it comes up smelling like roses. Average salary is $110,000. I keep reading that. Why? Who? Where does that data come from? That is what the Labor Dept. reports and I have seen that on Microsoft news. Kids and older adults read that and believe that data. But my buddies and I know the truth. None of us has come close to that in many years. I don't know a single lawyer who comes close to that. The Paul Campos figure of of 37K is reality, but his number doesn't come up in search results and get published.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keep in mind that to be counted as a lawyer, one actually has to have found a current job as a lawyer. That eliminates about half of all JD holders right off the bat.

      Also, 110k average includes the relatively few big law partners, PI lawyers, etc who make seven figures. It doesn't take many seven figure salaries to disguise the hordes of lawyers making in the mid five figures.

      Delete
    2. I make about that. A solo, 40 years out. My health insurance for me, my spouse, and kids is 20% of my gross income. My income tax bill is less than that, but not much. After my office expenses, my income tax was about $850. Such is the pathetic state of my practice.
      May God DAMN the law schools and the law school professors.

      I do.

      Delete
    3. Probably the saddest part of that $37k figure is that virtually every solo I know does doc review, and I'm fairly certain 95% of their total income is in fact from doc review. So the true solo practice income is truly pitiful.

      Whenever someone gets a full time job offer, suddenly their solo practice gets shut down. Not so much anymore, since it's hard to get anything at all, but this was an amusing and funny phenomena roughly a decade or so ago when the "JD-preferred" jobs were actually getting filled. Nowadays most of those jobs get filled by college grads instead.

      There are just too many lawyers. Even if you got rid of 25% of the lawyers I don't think there would be any real change either. The law schools pump out something like 55k grads a year, and the legal sector creates something like 3k positions a year. Ouch.

      Delete
    4. The large majority of job openings in law are indeed through attrition rather than actual growth. Law with its up-or-out culture has very high attrition that really helps mask the true depth of the crisis.

      The numbers are bad for recent grads; imagine how ugly they would be if we looked at JDs 10 years out. We would see a tiny number of wealthy partners and law school professors and a huge number of people scraping by in bad positions or working in other fields entirely.

      Given how badly things have degraded, law hardly deserves to be called a profession anymore.

      Delete
  15. As a 40 year solo, $110,000 is my max gross.

    ReplyDelete

 
Web Analytics