Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Pigs Come to Students’ Aid: On December 22, 2016, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry labeled “Law School Faculty Rebels Against For-Profit Infilaw, Stands By Students In Time Of Need.” Take a look at this opening:
“On Monday, the Department of Education announced that Charlotte School of Law, a for-profit Infilaw institution, would lose its eligibility to participate in the federal student loan program on December 31, 2016. Thanks to the school’s non-compliance with American Bar Association standards and its misrepresentations to students regarding their ability to pass the bar exam, Charlotte Law students are feeling as though they’ve been left out in the cold, despite the fact that administrators at the school claim to want to protect them.
The administration’s goal to protect students who have been wronged — not by Charlotte Law’s alleged malfeasance, of course, but by the Department of Education — flies in the face of what we’ve been told by students who attend the school. We’ve heard that members of the law school administration have blocked all student access to the seventh floor of the building where their offices are located, and haven’t been answering calls.
Charlotte Law faculty members, on the other hand, are standing by their students, and are ready to go to war for them. A source at the law school told us that faculty members are now “rebelling against [their] Infilaw overlords,” and sent out a strongly worded letter via email to all students and alumni of the school. Here’s a pertinent passage from that letter (which is available in full on the next page):
Students, we share in your feelings of sadness, anger, and disappointment. At this juncture, we are insisting that Infilaw recognize that decisions about admissions and curriculum must be made by the faculty. These decisions are the subject of our current situation and were made without the benefit of those best able to protect the students’ interests.
Despite the institutional failures listed in the letter from the DOE on December 19, 2016, we assure you that your faculty remains committed to delivering quality legal education. We are unified in our desire to the best by our students and alumni as we face the challenges ahead.
You know that your law school has been doing something incredibly wrong when the faculty refer to “institutional failures” in a letter that has been sent directly to students and alumni who have paid (or more likely, borrowed) money hand over fist to attend.” [Emphasis mine]
For $ome rea$on, these “legal educators” failed to mention that the faculty typically run law schools. Perhaps, the situation is different at this toilet, since Infilaw is owned and operated by Sterling Partners, a private-equity firm. In the end, this is mere window dressing. The bitches and hags simply want your borrowed money, dumbass.
Other Coverage: On December 27, 2016, the Editorial Board of the Charlotte Observer published a brutal op-ed piece that was entitled “Charlotte School of Law students deserved better.” Enjoy the following portion:
“Charlotte School of Law leaders have made some big mistakes, it seems. Unfortunately, the people paying for those mistakes are hundreds of innocent law school students.
According to recent reporting from the Observer’s Michael Gordon, students received little, if any, warning that the school has been under heavy accreditation scrutiny from the American Bar Association since March 2014, or that it has repeatedly been found lacking in its bar exam passage rate, academic rigor and its admissions standards. The ABA called it a “substantial and persistent” problem.
The 700 or so students at the private, for-profit law school in uptown Charlotte didn’t learn about all that until the ABA formally placed the school on probation in November, news that arrived just as final exams were about to begin.
That was followed by news that these same problems had prompted the U.S. Department of Education to block millions of dollars in student loans and other federal financial aid that would normally flow to the school.
The school had deceived students by masking the extent of its problems, the DOE said…
It is unclear if classes will resume on Jan. 14 as scheduled.
But what seems abundantly clear is that students remained in the dark about this for months, even as they continued to write hefty tuition checks and take out student loans to cover $60,000 in annual tuition and fees.
It seems particularly unconscionable that the school’s leadership would let students enroll for this fall’s classes without telling them about what was going on – especially since an ABA noncompliance report issued in July required the school to do exactly that. Students surely suspect that the school’s leadership cared more about the income stream than their welfare.” [Emphasis mine]
It’s nice to see mainstream news outlets barbecue the law school swine, for their blatant greed and deceit. In a just world, the “professors” and administrators would be pelted with vegetables – by the students and recent graduates.
Conclusion: Avoid Charlotte Sewer of Law, at all costs. While I don’t see the Department of Education withholding student loans to this trash pit for long, this action will sink the commode’s repuTTTTaTTTTion even further. Frankly, if this is the best law school that you can get into, then you are already on a losing path. Hell, full-time tuition at this dung heap – for the 2016-2017 academic year – amounts to $42,320! Yet, the best outcome you can hope to attain is toiletlaw. Why would anyone with an IQ above room temperature even consider incurring an additional $155K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for these garbage job prospects?!?! Do you hate yourself that much, Lemming?
Posted by Nando at 12:21 AM
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Charlotte School of Law Gets Bitch-Slapped by the Department of Education: No More Federal Loans and Grant Due to Its Deceptive Practices
Happy Holidays: On December 19, 2016, the Washington Post published an article from Danielle Douglas-Gabriel, under the beautiful headline “Education Department denies federal student aid to for-profit N.C. law school.” Enjoy the following glorious excerpt:
“The Education Department on Monday said Charlotte School of Law can no longer receive federal loans and grants for misleading students about their chances of passing the bar and its shaky accreditation with the American Bar Association.
“The ABA repeatedly found that the Charlotte School of Law does not prepare students for participation in the legal profession. Yet CSL continuously misrepresented itself to current and prospective students as hitting the mark,” Undersecretary of Education Ted Mitchell said in a statement. “CSL’s actions were misleading and dishonest. We can no longer allow them continued access to federal student aid.”
The bar association first raised concerns about Charlotte School of Law, a for-profit college founded in 2004, after an on-site evaluation last year. Examiners concluded that the school’s curriculum failed to prepare students to take the bar and that the administration admitted people incapable of completing the program. After months of hearings and requests for more information, the bar this summer said the law school was not living up to the standards necessary for accreditation.
Half of the 354 first-year students at the school dropped out of the program this year, compared with 45 percent last year, according to the Education Department. Of the 174 who left, more than 36 percent said it was due to academic attrition, meaning that they were not in good academic standing. The bar association said that of the 208 law schools it accredits, Charlotte School of Law has the highest number of first-year students leaving for academic reasons.
The law school appealed the bar’s decision, but the bar rejected the request and placed the school on probation in November, which ultimately led education officials to deny Charlotte access to federal student aid. The Education Department also takes issue with the school’s advertising that it is fully accredited, that it has a rigorous curriculum and that its students have an above-average rate of passing the bar, none of which is accurate.” [Emphasis mine]
Do you have any difficulty understanding that, Lemming?!?! Perhaps, you suck at reading comprehension – and could only muster an LSAT score of 144. Here are the key takeaways: (a) this trash pit KNOWINGLY misrepresented outcomes for its students; (b) it WILLINGLY admitted applicants who had no business being enrolled; and (c) it has the highest rate of attrition for academic reasons of all 208 ABA-accredited toilets. Got it now, Bitch?!
Press Release: On December 19, 2016, United States Department of Education furnished a statement entitled “Charlotte School of Law Denied Continued Access to Federal Student Aid Dollars.” From the opening:
“The U.S. Department of Education today announced that on Dec. 31, 2016, it will end access to federal student financial aid for Charlotte School of Law (CSL), a for-profit member institution in the InfiLaw System. This action furthers the Department’s commitment to vigorously protect students, safeguard taxpayer dollars, and increase institutional accountability among postsecondary institutions.
Following a review of the relevant information, the Department concluded that CSL’s non-compliance with the fundamental standards set by its accreditor, the American Bar Association (ABA), resulted in its violation of the Higher Education Act, the Department’s regulations, and CSL’s Program Participation Agreement with the Department. Additionally, the Department concluded that CSL made substantial misrepresentations to current and prospective students regarding the nature and extent of its accreditation and the likelihood that its graduates would pass the bar exam. Both findings merit denial of the school’s request for continued participation in the federal student aid programs.” [Emphasis mine]
Did that penetrate your small gray matter, prospective law student?! To those already enrolled in this dung heap, I am certain that you are already on the phone with private lenders so that you can finance the rest of your TTTT “legal education.”
Other Coverage: On December 19, 2016, Staci Zaretski posted an ATL entry that was labeled “Law School DENIED Access to Federal Student Loan Dollars.” I have provided her conclusion below:
“What are Charlotte Law students supposed to do now? Will they be forced to turn to private lenders to finance the rest of their legal educations at a school that recently posted its worst July bar exam passage rate — 45.24 percent — in nearly a decade?
Charlotte Law has until January 3, 2017, to submit evidence to dispute the Department of Education’s findings. Will Charlotte be the first InfiLaw institution to fold under the substantial weight of its own failures? Perhaps we’ll learn its fate in 2017.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, that figure above is correct. Think about that for a moment – 45.24 percent of first-time bar exam takers from this festering pile of rancid waste managed to pass the July 2016 test! In a just world, this cesspit would have been shuttered imediately. Of course, the scam continues because students are mere collateral damage. After all, law school pigs have to own nice suits, live in big homes, drive expensive cars – while managing to “work” for 4-10 hours per week.
Conclusion: In the last analysis, if this is the best law school that you can get into, then you are a cretin. Good luck trying to get through the day, without shoving a knife into an electric socket. I’m sure that your payee or residential home manager can get your ass dressed, after they bathe and shave you. Also, I don’t expect this action to last long. The school will likely cite to “a disparate impact on minority students.” However, InfiLaw may just try to dissolve that school – and place those students into the other trash pits in its consortium. Lastly, just think how high the bar pass failure rate would be if the commode didn’t kick out so many before graduation.
Posted by Nando at 5:56 AM
Sunday, December 18, 2016
The News: On December 16, 2016, Kathryn Rubino posted an ATL entry labeled “For Law Schools, No Change Is Good News.” Here is the full text of her report below:
“Some incredibly mediocre news from the world of legal education: the number of students enrolled in law school has barely increased. There are 36 more students in this year’s 1L class, and that counts as good news since it’s the first time these numbers have gone up since 2010 — when the impact of the Great Recession began to take its toll on law schools.
But to be clear, the small numerical increase registers as a statistical non-event, meaning the numbers are flat from last year. It should also be noted that even if this year’s bump in enrollment was a cause for celebration, law schools are still down 29 percent from their pre-recession highs.
The bad news, at least if you’re a law school admin hoping for a return to the glory days, is that these new numbers may be here for a while, as the National Law Journal reports:
Not so fast, said Derek Muller, a law professor at Pepperdine University School of Law who tracks enrollment trends on his blog Excess of Democracy. The new data suggests that this is the new reality for legal education.
“Flat” is good in the sense of stability, Muller said, but he added, “I think it’s bad for a lot of law schools that were hoping for growth, both in terms of quantity and quality. For schools that had been bracing for a short-term decline, with this bottoming out, I think they’re going to have to expect that this is the new normal.”
Muller predicted that the number of applicants this admissions cycle will remain stable, based on the fact that there has been no significant change in the number of people taking early administrations of the Law School Admission Test.
[Well], at least law schools aren’t losing students. These days, that counts as a reason for cheer.” [Emphasis mine]
Enjoy the “new normal,” bitches! At least, you vile swine are not saddled with outrageous sums of NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt – while hoping to crack into this GLUTTED field. Now, you rodents can go out and make a boatload of money in private practice. Of course, we know that you jackals would rather financially ruin young people - and swindle the taxpayers - than work hard for a living. Also, good luck finding a law firm that will pay you to take sabbaticals, so that you can write pointless law review articles.
Other Coverage: On December 16, 2016, Matt Leichter published an excellent analysis of the situation in his Law School Tuition Bubble blog. The article was entitled “2016: Full-Time Matriculants Trickle Up.” Pay attention to the following portion:
“In calendar year 2016, there were 32,864 full-time matriculants to 204 ABA-accredited law schools, up 257 matriculants from 2015 (+0.8 percent). That year saw an 838-matriculant decline, so the crunch has reversed for the law schools. (These figures exclude the three law school in Puerto Rico, as I usually do.)
Full-time applicant acceptance rates are largely flat, except at the 90th percentile.” [Emphasis mine]
That does not appear to be good news for the certified ABA toilets. For instance, how many top college grads are applying to CreighTTTon or $yracu$e? Take a look at the charts that Leichter compiled as well. Now scroll down for this excerpt:
“102 law schools saw a growth in applications, which is much higher than last year. First place goes to (and you’ll love this) … Indiana Tech (235.4 percent), which will close at the end of the academic year. It received 332 applications, extended only 128 offers, and admitted but 39 full-time students. Indiana Tech’s 75th percentile full-time applicant received a 152 on the LSAT. It preferred to close than accept 204 applicants (~60 percent). Numbers two and three for application growth were Florida (98.9 percent) and Concordia (71.0 percent).
Before anyone gets excited about rising law-school applications, though, I note that 123.5 percent of the rise can be attributed to U.S. News‘ top 14 law schools. That means that all of the growth this year can be attributed to these 14 law schools along with an offset to declines at other schools. Thus, things probably don’t look any better for most schools since last year. In the last two years, I’ve commented on the possibility that applicants believe that now is the best time to go to an elite law school, and while that sentiment dissipated last year, it’s back now for sure.” [Emphasis mine]
Recent college graduates with stellar LSAT scores are evidently taking advantage of the big-ass drop in applications since 2010. How does that help second tier sewers and third tier commodes?! The waterheads enrolling in those cesspits are still screwed. The job prospects remain bleak for TTT law students and graduates, but the "professors" and deans will be happy to take your loan money, i.e. taxpayer funds, anyway.
Conclusion: The bottom-feeding toilets continue to admit morons and cretins who have little to no connections, and essentially no shot in hell at becoming successful lawyers. It will be interesting to see if these ABA-accredited dung heaps are still giving out tuition reductions, i.e. scholarships, to entice these dunces to take the TTTT plunge. Try not to be too damn dumb and accept such an offer, Lemming. You are much better off staying at your current job, learning new skills, making real connections in your field or industry, and seeking pay increases or promotions. That will not cost you three years of your life and you will also avoid crushing debt.
Posted by Nando at 5:18 AM
Monday, December 12, 2016
News Coverage: On December 7, 2016, the Boston Globe published a piece from Laura Krantz, under the headline “UMass Law School gains full accreditation.” Look at this opening:
“The University of Massachusetts School of Law in Dartmouth announced Tuesday that it has received full accreditation by the American Bar Association, a milestone for the six-year-old school that has struggled with growing pains.
UMass officials said they believe its new status will propel the state’s first public law school, which has faced lackluster enrollment and ongoing financial issues, toward greater success and help in its mission to produce attorneys focused on social justice.
“For those of us concerned about protecting the rights of all residents of the Commonwealth, UMass Law will play a key role in that effort moving forward,” said UMass President Martin T. Meehan.
The school received provisional accreditation in 2012. After a visit in March and several rounds of meetings this fall, the bar association awarded full accreditation Dec. 2.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, this measure will propel this toilet to new heights, right?!?! The fact remains that this public cesspool will always be a dung heap that admits waterheads and delusional asswipes who cannot get into a real law school. At least now, it can obtain “Ranked Not Published” status by the pussies at US “News” & World Report.
Other Analysis: On December 7, 2016, OTLSS featured a post from "Old Guy," which was entitled “U Mass Dartmouth accredited; students are worth $53 per hour.” Read the whole article, but enjoy the following excerpt in particular:
“Don't accuse the ABA of letting ink encrust its rubber stamp of approval. Just months after accrediting Indiana Tech (only to see this internationally esteemed center of law & hip-hop shut its doors forever), the ABA has done the same for the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. See this puff piece that U Mass Dartmouth—call it "You Ass" for short—published yesterday:
U Mass Dartmouth rose like a phoenix (the University of Phoenix?) from the ashes of an entity called the Southern New England School of Law, which dumped its ass(ets) onto the state in 2010. The state, in exchange, felt compelled to set up its ninth—yes, ninth—law school.
Now, the establishment of law schools at Indiana Tech and possibly soon in southernmost Texas has been justified in part by the great distance that the fine denizens of Fort Wayne and McAllen would have to travel in order to attend the nearest law school. Weak as it indubitably is for Indiana and Texas, that argument seems downright risible for Massachusetts, which can be traversed from Pittsfield to Provincetown in only four hours—even more quickly if a Masshole is behind the wheel. So that argument wasn't even proffered in support of U Mass Dartmouth. Instead, the upstart academy was justified as the state's only public law school. Eight private ones, evidently, just do not meet the needs of the Bay State. Why stop at Harvard when you can have U Mass Dartmouth?
Like every other toilet school, U Mass Dartmouth claims a special mission: "to diversify the legal profession and expand access to justice for citizens". Ho-hum. Where have I heard that song before?
The puff piece proclaims that "UMass Law had the most diverse entering class in New England in 2015 (35.5%) and the rate is 33% this year"…
U Mass bears all the hallmarks of a toilet, especially its dreadful median LSAT score (148). Like so many other toilets, U Mass preys upon people who shouldn't be in law school, all the while congratulating itself for its "diversity".
What's this about "access to justice"? Just four days before announcing its accreditation, U Mass published another puff piece, this time about its students' volunteer work:
"Since the UMass School of Law was established at UMass Dartmouth in 2010 to serve the public interest, its students have delivered more than 87,000 hours of service to the community. This service has been valued at more than $4.5 million."
Pardon me? How can the "service" of students at a then-unaccredited toilet be worth that much? Because the bulk of the work, falling in the legal field (though what the students actually did is not clear), is assessed "[a]t $53 per hour (the amount paid to District Court-appointed lawyers in Massachusetts)". [Emphasis mine]
Licensed attorneys who graduated from this ABA-accredited pile of excrement would kill for a job that paid them $53 an hour. Hell, they would cry tears of joy while strangling a bum to death – with their bare hands.
Conclusion: Obtaining full accreditation from the American Bar Association cockroaches is about as big of an “accomplishment” as getting laid by a raggedy-ass prostitute. If you pay them, then they will perform the task assigned. Lemmings, this will not greatly increase your odds of landing decent legal positions. The Univer$iTTTTTy of Ma$$achu$eTTTTT$ Sewer of Law will remain a bottom-feeding commode for the duration of its existence. Get that through your thick skull, Dumbass.
Posted by Nando at 4:39 AM
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Pigs Up Against the Wall: On December 3, 2016, the Chicago Tribune published a David Rutter piece that was entitled “Valparaiso University’s law school might face bleak choices.” It alludes to the trash pit recently being censured by the gutless, ball-less, spineless American Bar Association. Enjoy the following excerpt:
“According to its gloomy forecast for budding lawyers, the New York Times reported that, as of this April, fewer than 70 percent of Valparaiso law graduates from the previous spring were employed and fewer than half were in jobs that required a law license. Only three of 131 graduates worked in large firms, which tend to pay more generous salaries.
Law school student debt is an ever-deepening ravine, from about $95,000 among borrowers at the average school in 2010 to about $112,000 in 2014, according to the advocacy group Law School Transparency.
Every number is pointing down, particularly jobs. While law school applications have slid by nearly 40 percent nationally since 2010, enrollment has dropped by only about 30 percent and full-time faculty members have decreased by less than 15 percent, according to ABA data.
VU's applicant pool is also down, which is why the school cut 21 faculty members and expects its law school population to drop by a third within two years.
VU's law school might be facing two unpalatable choices. Admit more unprepared students, which fulfills goals for diversity and inclusion, but damages graduation rates and quality. The school apparently already tried that model without success.” [Emphasis mine]
When will the jackals start admitting bums, prostitutes, and drug addicts? By the way, it’s always great to read about ABA-accredited dung heaps getting rid of some members of their worthless-ass faculty. If you ever feel sorry for these bloated cockroaches, just think of all the young lives they have helped ruin over the course of their greedy tenure. To them, the students and graduates are merely collateral damage.
Prior Coverage: On November 17, 2016, the Indiana Lawyer posted an Olivia Covington article headlined “Valparaiso Law public censure puts admission policies to test.” Take a look at this opening:
“Only weeks after Indiana Tech Law School suddenly announced it would be closing at the end of the academic year, another Indiana law school found itself in the news, dealing with a public censure from the American Bar Association over past admissions practices.
How much the sanction will impact that school, Valparaiso University Law School, depends on who you ask.
The ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar posted the notice of public censure Nov. 15, after the ABA Accreditation Committee found the northern Indiana law school had not demonstrated compliance with Standards 501(a) and 501(b). Those standards require that “a law school shall maintain sound admission policies and practices” and “shall not admit an applicant who does not appear capable of satisfactorily completing its program of legal education and being admitted to the bar.” [Emphasis mine]
Keep in mind that the ABA does not take this action often, even though dozens of member schools have reputations lower than alligator piss. Later on, the author includes this gem:
“Kyle McEntee, executive director and co-founder of Law School Transparency, does not see an easy way forward for Valparaiso. The 2016 entering class had a median LSAT score of 147, which is a modest improvement, he said, but not enough for the law school overcome this new obstacle.
Valparaiso is already having trouble meeting the current ABA’s standards for bar passage and those requirements could get more rigorous, McEntee said. A proposal from the Council of the ABA for the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar would close some loopholes and mandate that law schools post a 75 percent bar passage rate for graduates within two years of graduation.
The proposal is scheduled to be presented to the ABA House of Delegates in February 2017. Even if the delegates do not give their approval, McEntee expects the ABA legal education section will adopt the new standards anyway.” [Emphasis mine]
As you can see, the swine are happy to admit and enroll waterheads with pathetic LSAT scores. What a bastion of “integrity,” huh?!?! Still want to roll the dice on your financial future, Dumbass?! If so, then you do not have the mental fortitude to order from a drive through window.
Ranking: According to US “News” & World Report, Valparai$o Univer$iTTTTy Sewer of Law is rated as a FOURTH TIER TRASH PIT! Yes, what a prestigious insTTTTiTTTTuTTTTion of higher learning!
Conclusion: Avoid this certified cesspit as if your life depended on it, lemming. I don’t care if the desperate fools throw a full scholarship at you – or throw in a set of steak knives and some movie passes. It is not worth the opportunity costs or lost time and energy. Plus, decent law firms have no interest in hiring the typical TTTT graduate. You will not be served well by incurring an additional $145K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for a garbage law degree. Look for this pile of excrement to continue to admit mental midgets, and I would not be surprised if LSAT scores, for subsequent first year classes, even drop a little further.
Posted by Nando at 5:31 AM
Friday, December 2, 2016
Booyah: On December 1, 2016, the ABA Journal featured a Stephanie Francis Ward piece that was entitled “10 to 15 law schools could close if enrollment keeps shrinking, higher-ed market analyst says.” Enjoy this spectacular opening:
“Although there’s been a contraction in the law school market, tuition continues to rise, including at private institutions that take first-year students with lower LSAT scores and have high attrition rates, says Robert Zemsky, a professor of education at the University of Pennsylvania. Zemsky predicts several of these schools will close if trends continue.
His study, Mapping a Contracting Market, analyzed 171 law schools and found that enrollment dropped by 21 percent at private law schools between 2011 and 2015. At public law schools, enrollment dropped by 18 percent. Zemsky also analyzed attrition rates at schools within both categories.
He found that while private schools with the lowest attrition rates and the best LSAT scores had the highest market price per student, those with the highest attrition rates and the worst LSAT scores still cost more than private institutions seen as second or third-tier law schools. Zemsky’s use of market price also figures in scholarships and grants received from schools, rather than just the listed tuition prices.
“You’d think the least attractive school would charge the lowest price. What they’re doing is admitting students with relatively low LSAT scores, and charging them a high price for gambling on them,” says Zemsky, who presented his findings at a recent Chicago conference hosted by the Access Group Center for Research & Policy Analysis.
If the law student market contracts further, it’s possible that between 10 and 15 schools will close, says Zemsky, a founding director of Penn’s Institute for Research on Higher Education. He notes that law schools are already losing money.
“You can’t continue to muddle through and hold your breath,” he told the Chicago audience on Nov. 16. “You can only hold your breath for so long.” [Emphasis mine]
Short of open admissions, enrollment will continue to decline. Smarter college graduates are avoiding law school in droves. At the rate of tuition increases, even waterheads are reconsidering this route. What the hell is the point of following a proven path to financial ruin?!?
Prior Forecasts: Back on November 3, 2016, Paul Caron wrote a TaxProf Blog entry that was headlined “After Indiana Tech, How Many More Law Schools Will Close? 20? 80? Will A Top 25 School Be Among Them?” Look at this conclusion:
“The likelihood of law school closures has been a hot topic among law school professors and bloggers for the past two years.
Jerry Organ, of University of St. Thomas, compared today’s law school environment to what happened to dental schools in the 1980s. Ten percent closed due to a significant decline in the number of applicants. Could 10 percent of law schools shut down, he asked?
Dorothy Brown, of Emory University School of Law, believes a top law school will shut down in the next two to four years. “Primarily, the law school would have to be hemorrhaging a lot of money over a sustained period of time with no end in sight,” she wrote. “Not just a one-time deficit, but millions of dollars in deficits over a sustained period.”
And David Barnhizer, of Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, said 80 law schools are at risk of closing. “Just as the legal employment market is over-saturated due to the surplus numbers of graduates law schools pumped into the system over the past twenty years, the productive capacity of the law school ‘industry’ is entirely out of balance with all foreseeable need for law graduates,” he wrote. “Given the direction the traditional employment markets for lawyers are heading no more than 80-100 law schools could easily serve America’s need for new law graduates.”
In a Kaplan Test Prep survey, 65 percent of law school admissions officers thought it would be a good idea if at least a few law schools closed.” [Emphasis mine]
I’m sure none of those admi$$ion$ cockroaches felt that their dung heap should be closed. Not a single one!
Back on October 3, 2012, Brian Leiter prognosticated that up to 10 ABA toilets could be shuttered within 10 years. His piece was labeled “Predictions about Closings of ABA-Accredited Law School Over the Next Decade.” To wit:
“That 15% think no law schools at all will close may be wishful thinking, but perhaps there is a sound explanation for thinking that correct. My own opinion was that we'll see several law schools close during the next decade, but probably not more than ten--and that was the majority view among readers by a wide margin. Most vulnerable are going to be free-standing law schools that are relatively young. Relatively young law schools part of universities that are in vulnerable financial shape are also likely candidates.” [Emphasis mine]
Conclusion: Since then, Hamline Sewer of Law merged with William Mitchell Commode of Law – and Indiana TTTTech Law $chool announced that it will shut down in July 2017. Thomas Cooley has “affiliated” with Western Michigan University and still had to close up its Ann Arbor campus, one among several . Other cesspits have been purchased by larger schools, such as Texas Wesleyan selling its ass to Texas A&M. Several ABA schools have had to slash support staff and buyout “professor” contracts. Enrollment continues to drop, and schools are taking in dumber students. Do you get the picture yet, cretin?! This is excellent news for humanity, but a blow to the greedy academic pigs. Again, do not piss away your future just so these “educators” can buy a vacation home or lease another Mercedes.
Posted by Nando at 5:21 AM