Tuesday, February 16, 2016

First Tier Dung Heap University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law is Now Admitting GRE Applicants


Pathetic Development: On February 11, 2016, Elie Mystal posted an ATL entry that was labeled “Law School To Accept GREs In Order To Corner The Market On Mediocrities.” Check out this opening: 

"Nowadays, the only barriers to a legal education are the ability to fill out a financial aid form and the ability to fill out the LSAT. You don't even have to "take" the damn thing, JUST FILL IT OUT. Law schools are so desperate to fill seats that anybody can get in. The "brain drain" from law schools is real, and, like climate change, the only people who deny it are the very dumb or those who care more about their profit margins than a sustainable ecosystem.
At least the LSAT separates out the people who have done some basic research into legal education from those who think a J.D. and a Ph.D. in “law” are the same thing. But, evidently, that bar was just a little too high for some law schools. The University of Arizona Rogers College of Law has decided to accept GRE scores in lieu of LSAT scoresfor new applicants who choose that option. We’ve previously talked about Wake Forest Law looking into the same arrangement. 

That’s the University of Arizona, folks. We’re not talking about some InfiLaw diploma mill like Arizona Desiccation or Arizona Summit (only one of those names is a joke). We’re talking about a relatively respected state law school that is now inviting in people who couldn’t even be bothered to take the LSAT.” [Emphasis mine]

Currently, the Univer$ity of Arizona Jame$ E. Roger$ Commode of Law is rated as the co-42nd greatest, most remarkable and amazing in the entire nation, by US “News” & World Report. You expect this type of nonsense from sewage pits such as Cooley or Touro. Then again, the law school pigs want to put as many asses into seats as possible – even with fewer applicants.

Three paragraphs down, Mystal continue to piss on this public commode:

“Make no mistake about what is going on here. Now, not only will Arizona take pretty much everybody who is able to score above “illiterate” on the LSAT, they’ll also take the people who took the GREs but were too stupid to get into their first choice graduate program they wanted when they signed up for the damn test. 

People with good GRE scores will continue on their path. People with bad GRE scores will get caught in the law school trap. Watching Arizona do this is like watching the moment when a bear decides, “Why would I head to the salmon stream when there’s all this human garbage people have literally just been throwing away.” 

And in the bargain, Arizona will have an opportunity to hide the crappy LSAT scores of its admitted students from U.S. News by matriculating a class of students with no LSAT scores at all.” [Emphasis mine]


Other Coverage: On February 11, 2016, Paul Caron re-published a Karen Sloan piece from the National Law Journa;, in his TaxProf blog. He used the headline, “Arizona Is First Law School To Admit Students Based On GRE Instead Of LSAT.” Enjoy the following excerpt:

“No LSAT score? No problem—at least at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law. 

The law school in Tucson will become the first to accept applications from prospective students who have taken the GRE General Test instead of the LSAT, administrators announced Wednesday.

Effectively immediately, the school will consider either LSAT or GRE scores in admissions, a move the law school’s dean, Marc Miller, said would help it reach a broader pool of would-be applicants. That, in turn, should result in a stronger student body, he added. ... 

The school made the decision to accept the GRE after a study conducted by Educational Testing Services, which administers the GRE, concluded that the test, coupled with undergraduate grade-point average, is as reliable as the LSAT in predicting the taker’s success in the first year of law school. ... 

Loyola University Chicago School of Law Dean David Yellen predicted that other law schools will follow Arizona’s lead if the school is able to bring in a larger—and stronger—applicant pool as a result of accepting the alternative test. 

“I think this will potentially be a major change in legal education,” Yellen said. “If Arizona is successful using a different test, there will be a lot of pressure on other schools to move in that direction.” [Emphasis mine]

It’s sickening to see other jackals chime in and say that many law schools may follow this trash heap’s lead in accepting people who couldn’t be bothered to take the LSAT. Hell, you can now score 143 on the damn thing – and still gain admi$$ion to dozens of ABA-accredited toilets. In the end, this is another way for the rats to access more federal student loan money – again without taking the legal job market, or the graduates’ ability to repay the NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, into account. How principles and ethical, huh?!?!

Conclusion: At what point will the law school swine start admitting students who have merely graduated from college with a minimum GPA of 2.5, people?!?! Nobody can honestly state that the cockroaches are doing this for the benefit of students, potential legal clients, or even the supposed “profession.” Does anyone with an IQ above 70 think – for one damn second – that any group other than “professors” and administrators will gain from this scheme? Attending CreighTTTon or Albany Law Sewer, and graduating with $140K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, will not improve your financial situation, Dumbass!


  1. Two words: "sophisticated" consumers.

  2. Guys, this announcement is nothing new. This basically is the "Lets allow applicant via a side street".

    AMMPLE was the first. Then FAMU with LEAP... The LSAT doesn't mean anything and is bad at determining who is fit for law!!!

    How do you like them apples ... to the guys who think the LSAT and the BAR should keep people out from practicing!!!

    1. With apologies to 3:39, I note that an applicant’s use of good GRE scores instead of a bad LSAT score for law school admission, in my old neighborhood, would have been called “bustin’ in thru the back door.” Even though the GRE requires Math while the LSAT does not.

      The GRE option probably will be adopted by more schools. At first glance, it looks like an end-run around one of the key criteria of the US News rankings. But, as happened with all previous attempts by law schools to frustrate the steady march of “the rankings,” either US News itself will change the rankings formula to account for new practices or the ABA will be pushed into mandating more disclosures, thus negating any ground gained by the schools. Even now, some sharp mind is probably out there working on an “equivalent competitiveness scale” showing which combinations of GRE scores are equivalent to each possible LSAT score so that law school rankings can proceed irrespective of which test the applicants take.

      The long-term effect of the “GRE option” may well be to increase the number of law applicants amongst people who are sitting on the fence about what to do with their lives, but who have already taken the GRE. For these people, not having to take the LSAT would save them a lot of money and effort in test preparation, as well as a time-lag of several months since the LSAT is only offered 4 times a year. Whether these fence-sitters are the best candidates for law school, however, is another issue entirely.

    2. Damn right, 3:39am!
      And no licensing exams for anyone-not doctors or nurses or dentists or pharmacists-we all agree, these tests, just like the Bar, are phoney-baloney barriers to entry. Here's to your unlicensed dentist-it's gonna be an interesting root canal-but Mr. AAMPLE, I've got a feeling you'll enjoy it.

    3. With apologies to 3:39, I note that an applicant’s use of good GRE scores instead of a bad LSAT score for law school admission, in my old neighborhood, would have been called “bustin’ in thru the back door.” Even though the GRE requires Math while the LSAT does not.

      The GRE option probably will be adopted by more schools. At first glance, it looks like an end-run around one of the key criteria of the US News rankings. But, as happened with all previous attempts by law schools to frustrate the steady march of “the rankings,” either US News itself will change the rankings formula to account for new practices or the ABA will be pushed into mandating more disclosures, thus negating any ground gained by the schools. Even now, some sharp mind is probably out there working on an “equivalent competitiveness scale” showing which combinations of GRE scores are equivalent to each possible LSAT score so that law school rankings can proceed irrespective of which test the applicants take.

      The long-term effect of the “GRE option” may well be to increase the number of law applicants amongst people who are sitting on the fence about what to do with their lives, but who have already taken the GRE. For these people, not having to take the LSAT would save them a lot of money and effort in test preparation, as well as a time-lag of several months since the LSAT is only offered 4 times a year. Whether these fence-sitters are the best candidates for law school, however, is another issue entirely.

    4. @ 3:39

      You for got to mention that now there is an additional side door with the 3 + 3 option. The law school are getting really creative.

  3. So sick and wrong... this just speaks for itself.
    Hopefully, anyone smart enough to pass and ace the GRE will also be smart enough to avoid the law school scam.

  4. I really feel sorry for students at the so called (by US News) lower ranked tier 1 schools. As Old Guy has so eloquently pointed out, Anything outside the Elite T-7 plus maybe Cornell, UVA, and Michigan, is an extreme roll of the dice. These students just missed the magic 170 LSAT for the elite schools.
    So the poor schmuck gets a 168, and has great undergraduate grades, and is admitted to a so called prestige (but not elite) school like Georgetown. Schmuck graduates in the middle of the class, because no matter how hard he works, everyone else in the class is smart and ambitions as well.

    Schmuck them has great options. Shit law, doc review, or an unpaid internship at a public defenders office. Schmuck then quits the legal profession and goes to teach at some private high school which he could have done right out of a good college.

    But alas he has wasted 3 years of his life and owes $250,00 on his student loans. Great life.

    1. And Georgetown is T-14, which used to mean a bit more. It was "solid" schools like GWU (quintessential trap school) which really played on this shit. Loads of pretend prestige, little actual prestige, but high enough in rank to suck up a lot of naive students with pretty high GPAs and LSATs.

    2. G-Town is the classic example of a trap school. Excellent example of the genre.

    3. Well, these days a 168 will get one into quite a few of the dozen or so schools that may possibly be worth attending. Sometimes even a 164 will do.

      But your point is well taken. Some years ago, the kinds of places that would welcome a 168 or a 165 with open arms did present a decent chance of good employment. Today, however, they do not. Yet those "top" schools retain their prestige, and people who score in the top 10% on the LSAT go there like lambs to the slaughter.

      Georgetown is the poster child of trap schools.

    4. Georgetown is the Harvard of Trap Schools.

  5. Today the GRE, tomorrow the GED! Butts in seats! Butts in seats!

    1. Fuck. GEDs? Tomorrow, it'll be a score of 80 on a high school spelling quiz.

    2. Perfect Score on the Belch the Alphabet Game will get you a 50% scholarship.

  6. Being behind on student loan payments in Texas could cost you more than your credit score. The US Marshals Service in Houston is arresting people who aren’t paying their federal student debt.

    Paul Aker said that seven deputy US Marshals showed up at his Houston home in combat gear.

    "I was wondering, why are you here. I am home, I haven't done anything,” he told Fox 26, adding that he didn’t receive any notice about a $1,500 student loan he received in 1987(!).


    1. Probably results from being in contempt for not answering interrogatories. It isn't so simple as don't pay and go to a debtors prison.

    2. Debtor's prison still existed in some states within living memory. Fortunately, it's gone now.

  7. Some ramblings from the trenches:

    1. Local attorney ad seen yesterday offers free consultations (not just Personal Injury, but everything, apparently) "in office, by phone, by email..." Hmmmmm, apparently no sense of self-preservation, giving advice to the world, client unknown, scope of dissemination of advice unknown, to mention a few problems.

    2. Local Bar Assn. has recognition awards for attorneys who have practiced for 50 years. Mostly because they have to in order to keep eating.

    3. Ad for attorney with "0 -3 years experience-salary commensurate with experience." 0L's-you get the picture?

    1. Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance KingFebruary 16, 2016 at 4:35 PM

      Another big scam in my opinion: There are billboards in and around the Chicago area along various expressways from the Ticket Clinic that advertise $49.00 traffic court attorneys. FROM $49.00---don't court to court, don't plead guilty and don't pay the fine....

  8. Hey-it's a great way to inflate that average LSAT score to game the USNWR rankings-who said the scammers couldn't adjust? Seriously, next they'll be taking GEDs to go along with the GREs; who needs a college degree anyway to go to law school?

  9. Meh. Rutgers-Camden was soliciting GMAT takers four years ago. Looks like this particular scam is working its way up the law school food chain. I'll bet if you sent a high enough GMAT or GRE score to Georgetown Law they'd take you.


  10. Hey Nando, remember 2 years ago when the ABA gave the go-ahead for schools to admit 10% of their class without having taken LSAT, and you said (paraphrasing), "this year it's 10%, in a couple years it might be 20%, then 30", etc.

    Well, if anything it looks like you potentially undershot those percentages. I wouldn't be shocked if half the people accepted in 3 years didn't have LSATs.

  11. Here is a good blog post comparing the LSAT to the GRE:


    The following quote from the post suggests that it is harder to boost one's LSAT than one's GRE score through preparation:

    "[T]he LSAT doesn’t test any facts or formulas that you can memorize. You’ve got no crutch to lean on for any part of the LSAT. Even someone who is nearly perfect at games is going to stumble on one of them occasionally."

    My guess is that explains why Arizona, and presumably other law schools, are eager to offer a GRE alternative to the LSAT. Law schools can funnel marginal likely applicants into GRE prep courses with confidence that such spoon-feeding will result in a bigger boost in scores than LSAT prep courses would. GRE admissions will function as a a smoke and mirrors device to obscure the weak abilities of many law school applicants.

  12. I think you're all missing the point. Using the GRE allows for recruiting students on an "impulse" basis; like the chocolates at the checkout counter.

    You got a so-so GRE? Well, have you considered law school? No further testing required!

  13. How can an ABA-accredited law school admit people who haven't taken the LSAT? I thought that the LSAT was required.

    As someone said above, the law skules are trying to seduce people whose GRE scores are too poor for graduate school but quite acceptable for La Toilette School of Law and Small-Engine Repair. Admitting people on the basis of a GRE score will only serve to confuse the issue of standards and quality. The GRE is not comparable to the LSAT, and I see no reason to believe that it can serve as a useful substitute.

    1. small engine repair is probably more lucrative than shit law...

  14. http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2016/02/arizona-is-first-law-school-to-admit-students-based-on-gre-instead-of-lsat.html

    From the Comments section of Paul Caron’s piece:

    “Legal Ed is incorrigible.

    Posted by: Jojo | Feb 11, 2016 3:26:03 AM

    Cooley wants to let people in based on blood type. Anything to keep the 'can barely fog a mirror' LSAT scores off their public disclosures.

    Posted by: terry malloy | Feb 11, 2016 8:32:09 AM

    I'm really puzzled by the law school scam crowd's resistance to this kind of move. The LSAT is an artificial monopoly, indefesibly imposed upon law schools by an over-reaching ABA, that places considerable inconveniences and expenses on the backs of law school applicants. LSAC and the ABA have done virtually nothing – for obvious reasons, in the case of the LSAC, whose leadership makes enormous salaries from student fees– to explore alternatives to the expensive and inconvenient LSAT that might be more or less as useful in screening out hopeless law students. Part of Arizona’s motivation is surely to “game” USNWR, but so what? USNWR is about as socially useful here as is the ABA.

    Posted by: Jason Yackee | Feb 11, 2016 9:49:39 AM


    I have no problem with GRE per se, but Legal Ed has shown that it cares about butts in seats rather than the profession. I view it with a level of skepticism with which I would view Countrywide Financial's calls for an alternative to the ratings agencies on subprime debt.

    Posted by: Jojo | Feb 11, 2016 10:18:04 AM

    I, for one, am against law schools' incessant, thinly veiled ploys to tap the federal loan keg at all costs, in order to survive. Broadening the pool to GRE takers is just a way to mitigate lost revenue from the otherwise low applicant pool. Many law schools should do what a number of self-respecting Dentistry schools did back in the 1980's - close. But they won't, legal profession be damned.

    Posted by: Anon | Feb 11, 2016 12:40:02 PM

    "The LSAT does not seem to be predictive of law school outcome any more than the bar exam is indicative of practice performance."

    Funny, I find bar exam failure to be a 100% predictor of practice performance: they can't practice.

    Posted by: Unemployed Northeastern | Feb 11, 2016 9:17:34 PM”

    When will the cockroaches start admitting students based on their ACT or SAT scores from when they were still in high school?! Hell, at this point, the pigs are only concerned with getting asses in seats. Yes, what a robust “profession,” huh?!?!

  15. If it can get an applicant a full-tuition scholarship with no strings attached, then it can't be all that bad. I would think that going to the U of A would still be a safe bet for someone wishing to practice in Arizona. If a student's folks live in Tucson, and a student can live rent free, then this could be a decent move.

    Just don't go into debt to attend.

    1. Wrong.

      If there are not enough lawyer jobs, you screw yourself going with a scholarship. If you cannot find full-time permanent work as a lawyer at age 26, 36, 46, or 56, you have made the wrong decision.

      Because of the huge lawyer oversupply, the up or out system in law firms, the fact that so many lawyer jobs today are temp or doc review, the demise of solo practice as a realistic option for earning a living, the fact that most law firm partners in substantial firms are white male, U of A on scholarship will be a bad decision for most.

      You need a paycheck for many years going forward. U of A, even on scholarship, practically guarantees you will not have that paycheck for much of the time you need it.

      Bad decision for most to go to U of A Law on scholarship.

  16. The oversupply of lawyers problem is never going to end at this rate. The GRE is a hard test, requiring extensive periods of study, just like the LSAT if one wants to get PhD from a top school. In the law school context, the GRE does not work because it does not enable a school to evaluate applicants against one another on a standardized basis, and does not allow for a comparison between law schools.

    On a related subject, Nando, I don't think you should recommend top 8 law schools in your introduction, above, just because someone gets a scholarship. With a surplus of at least half a million licensed lawyers, up or out systems still prevalent in larger law firms and maybe one in ten making partner, pyramid-like age structures in larger law firms, with relatively few lawyers surviving in law firms into their 50s and later, most equity partners being white males, high job turnover for lawyers, - all these factors suggest that it may not be a good decision to go to a T8 law school on scholarship for many people.

    The value of a T8 degree declines with the person's age. That is the nature of an up or out system. In later years, when lawyers are culled out of the profession, or at least out of full-time permanent lawyer work by the age pyramid, that T8 degree becomes almost meaningless. A younger person who managed to break into the system from a lower tier school will easily beat out the older T8. Youth has its great advantages in law, and trumps a T8 law degree.

    If you cannot work in a full-time permanent job as a lawyer after age 52, which today is the case for a high proportion of T8 grads, the fact that you went to that law school on scholarship is not going to help you. Going to law school was a mistake.

    1. Until politicians start going to jail for conflict of interest and failure to perform to their fiduciary duty to the citizens of this country, the scam will continue.

      Legalized bribery also has to end. It makes no sense how you can just use a different term and then make something legal. Lobbying is absurd.

      Why can't this concept be applied to all the other crimes, especially non-violent crimes, in the US? Drug use can be changed to "self directed medication" for instance.

      I don't know why anyone has any faith in the courts or the system of government. They don't even try to hide that the elites of this country have their own set of rules, both for law and business enterprise. Why is it so hard for Americans to admit the process is completely illegitimate? Is it due to fear or arrogance? Surely people can not be so stupid as not to see how the same set of laws are applied so differently based on class?

  17. TOEFL is good too, yes?

  18. We need to divert half of the unemployed or underemployed non-elite T-1 or regional law school grads into high school teaching. These are generally very bright people who didn’t hit the top 10-20% in the law school lottery, and are now striking out in the imploding legal services market. The problem is our country does not accord high status to teachers, as do European Countries. In the UK and France high school teaching is highly respected as a career. Look at John Cleese, of Monty Python fame. He attended Cambridge University, where he received his law degree, and taught in a secondary school before working as a scriptwriter for the BBC. What student wouldn’t want to be taught by a teacher like that?

    Our graduate education schools are pathetic, with some of the lowest GRE scores. If the US is to have a hope competing against the Asiatic hordes, we need to motive and educate our young people by channeling bright people into the teaching profession. Non T-4 Law school students might well fit the bill.

    By the way, teachers in good suburban school districts commonly make upward of $100K. Who but the rapidly winnowing big or mid law partners can say they make comparable money with a 3-month summer vacation to boot?

    1. If there's one field more glutted than law, it's teaching.

      Those are high salary, protected positions. You really think all the current teachers are just going to give up their cushy paychecks for some law grads?

      I tried getting a teaching job back around 2009 or 2010. Even with a STEM background and my JD they wanted nothing to do with me.

      There is a whole career path that goes through a year or two of teaching and leads into high level Corporate America positions for the gilded classes.

      If you can't get a decent position in law you're not suddenly going to get one in teaching. If you are not born into connections you are fucked, period. It doesn't matter what field you look at, if it pays well, and it's not medicine, you won't be allowed in.

    2. 10:39 Have to disagree. I know a Tulane law grad who couldn't make it in law who quit and then worked his way up in a private school from a TOEFL counselor to become a top administrator in a well regarded New England Prep school. I'm sure his starting salary was not great, but now makes good $$ with summers off.

  19. Buyer Beware !!!!!!!!!!

    Among students who graduated from InfiLaw PRIVATE schools in 2013, the percentage who obtained federal clerkships or jobs with large law firms was slightly below 1 percent—0.92 percent, to be exact.

    In other words, the odds of a graduate of one of these schools getting a job that arguably justifies incurring the schools’ typical debt level are essentially 100 to 1.


    The Law Schools have the data and yet they won't adjust their tuition to market conditions?

    This is a recipe for financial ruins!!

    1. Anyone stupid enough to go to an Infilaw school is a moron and deserves no sympathy.

  20. 2 points:
    1. I love this website. I was "born at the right time," in the sense that when I graduated from law school in 1998, my undergrad and law debt was about $100K. But I am sympathetic to people who were screwed by the law school scheme that promised too much causing people to borrow too much.
    2. What is the point of eliminating the LSAT? I mean, if someone excels at the GRE and someone else does fine but not great on the LSAT, does U of A take the GRE candidate? I suspect yes. It's kind of ridiculous.

  21. People don't get that the median income for a licensed lawyer today is in the range of $40,000. If you get a scholarship, you still have three years of opportunity cost for having attended law school as well as the living expense as costs of attendance.

    At a $40,000 median income for LICENSED LAWYERS, it does not pay for most people to attend law school. Graduates of good colleges. with decent academics and good interview and interpersonal skills can get $40,000 or significantly more as an entry level salary. If you are in Tuscon or Central Florida, you may need to move to an urban area to get work requiring a BA.

    Law school is not going to help people at the median to earn a better living than their BA because the huge lawyer oversupply has brought the median incomes of licensed lawyers at or below the level of a median BA.

    Arizona Law does not pay at the median, even on full scholarship.

  22. The reason that U of A does not pay for most people is that the existing oversupply of licensed lawyers is overwhelming and will not be absorbed in the next 20 or 25 years. You have more than half a million licensed lawyers who are below the line so to speak in employer surveys of the BLS. That means if 600,000 employed lawyers earn a median of $115,000, the other six hundred thousand licensed lawyers do not have their incomes counted. Many of these lawyers are solos, temps, doc reviewers, many of who cannot get full-time work and are working half or a third or a quarter of a job as a licensed lawyer. If the median income of solos is $40,000, you can be sure doc reviewers at $25 an hour and temps whose ability to actually work on any regular schedule is questionable given the huge lawyer oversupply are not earning significantly more than $40,000.

    The $115,000 median income figure put out by BLS only includes the half of all licensed lawyers who are working and annualizes their salary on the assumption they are working full-time. The assumption of full-time work is faulty in a severe oversupply of lawyers with many lawyers doing temp work or soloing or just looking for work.

    Arizona is also a state with limited demand for lawyers. Not everybody has the money to pay for a lawyer, In fact probably a small very affluent sector has that money either personally or through business. The run of the mill small business or individual in Arizona will do without lawyers at all potential costs to themselves because they just cannot afford it.

    Going to U of A is like gambling in Vegas- a few people will win big, but most people will lose- just walk away empty-handed.

    1. And where is that business cohort, that can actually afford legal services, going to be taking their business? To a big firm with HYS trained partners related to Barry Goldwater, not to some small firm run by local hill billies. Of course the HYS partners will hire a few top 10% Arizona law grads as wage slave scum for a few years and then spit them out on the unemployment line.

    2. It is likely that there are numbers of partners from local law schools. It is just that their numbers are small because the number of partners in substantial law firms in Arizona is small.

      The sense is that the law business in Arizona is too small and too low paying to support more probably than 50 or 60 person law school class each year. Any larger classes, and most graduates of U of A will be eaten alive.

  23. https://law.arizona.edu/arizona-law-school-gre

    Here is the link to the commode’s February 10, 2016 press release, “UA Becomes First Law School to Open Admissions to All GRE® Test Takers after Study Reveals Test Validity.” Try not to throw up while consuming this filth:

    “The University of Arizona College of Law will now accept either GRE® General Test or Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores from all applicants.

    A study conducted in December 2015 by Educational Testing Service (ETS) demonstrated that, for students in Arizona Law’s JD program, performance on the GRE General Test is a valid and reliable predictor of students’ first-term law school grades, and so meets the American Bar Association’s Legal Education Standard for use in admissions to law school programs.

    Arizona Law is the first law school to validate the GRE test for all applicants. The college submitted formal notification of the policy change to the American Bar Association Section on Legal Education yesterday.

    “We believe the goals of excellence and diversity in legal education and in the profession will be better achieved if the LSAT is not the only standardized test used by law schools,” said Dean Marc Miller. “By using the GRE test, which is accepted by thousands of graduate and professional degree programs, from biochemistry to public policy to philosophy, we are able to consider qualified applicants from more diverse backgrounds.”

    The study compared the GRE and LSAT scores of current Arizona Law students and recent graduates with their law school grades. The results show that the GRE test, which assesses verbal reasoning, quantitative reasoning, critical thinking and analytical writing, is as good a predictor for law school success for Arizona Law students as the LSAT.

    “The skills assessed by the GRE General Test fit closely with the skills and educational objectives of law schools,” said David Payne, ETS Vice President & COO of Global Education. “Furthermore, the GRE test could open more pathways to law schools, increasing diversity in all its forms, and making it easier for students to pursue joint degrees.”

    Notice the buzzword “diversity” in this TTT announcement. [Read: Too stupid to get into a top PhD or Master’s program in your preferred field of study? That’s okay! You can enroll in our law school! Call in the next 30 minutes, and we’ll give you a set of Chicago Cutlery knives!] Goofy Looking Bastard Marc Miller merely wants to get more idiots enrolled, and not have it affect the toilet’s LSAT score for matriculants. He still gets the federal student loan money.


    Anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see the trend. As the toilets have stuggled with fewer applicants and smaller enrollment, they have come up with the following schemes:

    Automatic enrollment for undergrads at the same university, with high GPAs;
    Allowing a certain percentage of the class without having them take the LSAT;
    Accepting GRE scores in lieu of the law school admission exam.

    At one point will ABA-accredited diploma mills admit applicants who can furnish them with a spelling quiz score of 80% or higher? The only good thing about this nonsense is that now more people will realize that “legal education” is a sick joke and a scam.

  24. When you have a moment, check out Payne’s profile:


    “David G. Payne
    VP and COO at Educational Testing Service
    Greater New York City AreaHigher Education


    VP and COO, Global Education
    Educational Testing Service (ETS)
    January 2014 – Present (2 years 2 months)

    Responsible for ETS' $500M Global Education Division, which includes all College, Graduate School, Business School and International English Language Academic Assessment Programs including ancillary services and products. Product families include:

    GRE (Graduate Record Examination; Graduate and Business School Admissions Test)
    TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language; academic English language assessment)
    EXADEP (Examen de Admission a Estudios de Posgrado; Spanish language graduate admissions test)
    ETS Proficiency Profile (Student Learning Outcomes)
    Major Field Tests (undergraduate and MBA Student Learning Outcomes)
    SIR II (Course/Instructor Evaluation Tools)
    iSkills (ICT Literacy)
    Success Navigator (Academic Skills, Commitment, Self-management and Social Support skills critical to academic success)”

    As you can see, “higher education” in the U.S. is Big Business. The testing pigs also make out with HUGE sums of money – all so people can purchase advanced degrees. Let’s not kid ourselves: once you get into a Master’s degree program or above, with the possible exception of medical and veterinary school, you are in charge of whether you will complete the degree.

    Hell, millions of college graduates badly want to get into the advanced degree program of their choice. Apparently, they are not fully aware that an MA or MSW will likely result in them obtaining a garbage job, earning $41K per year. At any rate, if they cannot get into school for a PhD, many of these HumaniTTTies grads will turn their attention to another field of $tudy. Those who opt for law school – as an afterthought – are likely to be even less keen to the GLUTTED job market.

    By the way, this GRE route speaks volumes about the law school pigs. Someone who initially wanted to go into an Anthropology PhD program, but couldn’t get into a top school, typically does not have the desire to be a lawyer. They will end up doing something else for a living – but they will still be strapped down with ridiculous sums of NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt. Then again, the evil bitches who operate law schools have never given a damn about their graduates’ outcomes.

  25. If you look at Snell & Wilmer, the largest law firm in Arizona, there is not a huge representation of U of A among the partners in Phoenix. The partners come from law schools all over the U.S.

    The published employment stats for 2014 show exactly 13 of 144 grads worked in firms of 26 lawyers or more, and another 5 got federal clerkships.

    The demand for U of A Law grads is not there in any numbers close to the size of the class they are seeking.

    Switching from the LSAT to the GRE will not increase the demand for U of A grads. It is a desperate effort to attract law students to an absolute dead end career path with huge opportunity costs and for most huge debt.

  26. 16,155 licensed lawyers in Arizona in 2015 as per ABA. 9840 lawyer jobs as per BLS. Even taking into account that some lawyers are licensed in more than one state, most lawyers in Arizona may not be. Big lawyer oversupply in Arizona.

    The test does not matter. Going to U of A you are playing Russian roulette with your future.


Web Analytics