Monday, August 21, 2017

Open Letter to the Incoming JD Class of 2020


Doubtless, you are proud of your supposed achievement of gaining entry into an ABA-accredited law school. Look at the information below, and you will see that beating a senile, old man in a game of poker is a bigger accomplishment. I’m sure that you feel that a small chance of landing Biglaw, i.e. a job that pays enough for you to pay off your students loans, is worth the immense cost of admission.

https://lawschooli.com/acceptance-rates/

Easy Admissions: On August 10, 2017, LawSchooli published a Joshua Craven piece labeled “Law School Acceptance Rates: The Hardest & Easiest Law Schools to Get Into.” He listed all 204 in$titution$. Here is his opening:

“Law school acceptance rates are an important admissions statistic to consider when you’re applying to law school. In this post, we take a look at the admission rates for every ABA-accredited law school in the US. The table below ranks all 204 law schools from the most selective to the least selective.

The range is broad from the extremely selective—Yale admits only about 9% of applicants—to the unscrupulously open, with schools towards the bottom of the pack accepting a whopping 80% or more of prospective students.

Acceptance rates are a fairly good proxy for how a school ranks in the minds of potential law students. The more desirable a school is, the more people apply and the more the picky the school can be when deciding who they’ll admit. For this reason, the acceptance rate is one of the factors measured in the US News and World Report’s influential rankings of the best law schools.” [Emphasis mine]

According to that chart, here are the 15 easiest diploma factories to gain entry into, in the country. The figures below represent acceptance rate, number of applicants, and number of acceptances, respectively:

190. Depaul University; 69.47%; 1,798; 1,249
191. California Western School of Law; 69.53%; 1,503; 1,045
192. Santa Clara University; 69.54%; 2,157; 1,500
193. Southern Illinois University – Carbondale; 70.04%; 474; 332
194. St. Thomas, University of (Minnesota); 71.13%; 478; 340
195. Charleston School of Law; 72.50%; 1,258; 912
196. Mitchell Hamline; 72.60%; 1,033; 750
197. Creighton University; 72.88%; 944; 688
198. Willamette University; 74.16%; 507; 376
199. Northern Kentucky University; 76.71%; 498; 382
200. Capital University; 79.17%; 528; 418
201. Vermont Law School; 80.96%; 646; 523 
202. Thomas Jefferson School of Law; 82.66%; 1,107; 915 
203. Loyola University – New Orleans; 84.77%; 709; 601 
204. Thomas M. Cooley Law School; 85.75%; 1,067; 915

Look at the entire graph. You will notice that only the top 30 law schools feature an acceptance rate below 32 percent. In 113 of the 204 diploma factories, more than half of all applicants gained admi$$ion. Hopefully you didn’t leave a good job to attend any of those in$titution$. Apparently, dozens of ABA-accredited schools are happy to admit anyone with a pulse. Keep in mind that a 144 on the LSAT is good enough to get you into several places now. 

http://www.nalp.org/uploads/Classof2016_NationalSummaryReport.pdf

Weak Employment Outlook: According to the NALP Class of 2016 National Summary Report, there were 37,124 graduates in that cohort – competing for a total of 24,243 jobs requiring bar passage. That translates to 65.3% of the class. Roughly 1/3 of grads ended up in positions that do not require a damn law degree. What a great “investment,” huh?!?!

Furthermore, 16,601 positions were in private practice. However, only 15,232 of those required bar passage. There were 3,300 clerkships for that group. Of that number, a mere 1,195 were in federal courts. You can be sure that the bulk of those posts went to graduates of top 10 schools. These grads are on the inside track to become “law professors.” Yet, third and fourth tier schools will still charge you $40K+ in annual tuition – when essentially all of their students are out of the running.

Also, of the 16,601 private practice jobs, only 1,007 were for offices with 251-500 lawyers. And 4,238 graduates ended up in firms of more than 500 attorneys. Another 948 landed positions in offices of 101-250 lawyers. That is a total of 6,193 such posts – out of 37,126 total grads. That is 16.7% of the entire cohort, which is roughly one out of six JDs. Plus, the vast majority of those jobs went to those who earned their degree from a top 10 law school – with some of the rest going to the rich and connected who ended up at middling in$titution$.

Scroll down to the bottom of the second page. Under the Source of Job section, the number reported was only 23,614. Of that amount, a total of 4,299 were the result of Fall OCI and 364 from Spring OCI. Fully 1,292 returned to their prior job, and another 674 decided to start their own practice. That means that most JDs had to hustle to land employment. The degree itself didn’t do much for them. In the Job Characteristics portion, you will see that 30.7% of academic positions were short-term, and 29.7% were part-time.

Conclusion: In the final analysis, if you have chosen to ignore the reams of data showing that law school is an incredibly expensive gamble, then how do figure that you will be able to effectively represent others in legal disputes? In any economic decision, failing to review pertinent information and facts is not a virtue. However, in a legal setting such negligence constitutes incompetence. 

I don’t expect anyone to quit during the first two weeks of law school, but you still have an out soon after. If you are at a non-elite school and your grades do not place you in the top 10% of the class after your first semester, then drop out immediately. You can explain a 5-6 month gap in employment to companies much easier than you can repay $160K+ in non-dischargeable debt, on a paltry $43K annual salary. Best of luck to you all.

44 comments:

  1. Being in the top 10% of the class at one or another toilet school isn't going to serve a person well when looking for work. It may well help, though, to secure admission by transfer into a more respectable school.

    Old Guy's advice: If you're in the top 10% of the class at the end of your first semester at a toilet, transfer into the top three tiers (Harvard, Yale, Chicago, Columbia, NYU, Stanford, Berkeley, Cornell, Duke, Michigan, Northwestern, Penn, Virginia) or else drop out. If you're not in the top 10%, drop out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some schools—Illinois, Minnesota, Washington & Lee—that just a few years ago were widely considered respectable, and that in the minds of many ill-informed people still are, admit about half of their applicants. That's not selective in the slightest.

    Just exactly how lousy does a person have to be in order to be rejected at Cooley, which turns away only one applicant in seven? I'd bet that a lot of the people who are rejected there never managed to complete the application or else were plainly inadmissible in some other way, even at an institution that lacks meaningful standards of admission.

    These days 144 is above the median at five law schools and at the median at three others (well, two now that Charlotte has closed). It could be expected to bring a substantial discount at those toilets, and probably many others as well. Cooley draws at least a quarter of its huge class from the ranks of those with scores no higher than 138—the tenth percentile. And of course the scam-fostering ABA sits by and does not a goddamn thing about this disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One important question to ask is whether you have connections in this industry or not. Think about how many people who get their first law jobs because of family, buisness or political connections. I guarantee that of those few thousand bar passage required jobs which law grads get, a significant number are landed not because of academic excellence or hustling one's way into the business, but rather because a certain law grad's father is a senior partner in one of those big prestigious law firms or some big business magnate's son, said big business magnate being a long-time client of one of those big prestigious law firms, just graduated from law school and needs a first job.

    It has been posted here far too many times to ignore: If you're not rich and connected, then law school is an incredibly expensive gamble, the price for losing being a lifetime of debt servitude and marginal employment. And make no mistake, if you're not in the proverbial club, chances are very good that the odds are already heavily stacked against you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very true! There are those that can graduate with a two point O and barely pass the bar but they will have a seat at the table. For anyone thinking that they can overcome this phenomenon keep in mind that this has been going on before any of us were born and will continue after we're all gone. It might not be impossible but it is very highly improbable to make it in law if you are not one of the "beautiful people".

      Delete
  4. This is the first time in over 20 years I won't be teaching law students. I will say the pool of applicants got markedly weaker around five years ago. And that's significant.

    In the late 90s I taught at a really good law school. I took more money to teach at a lower school. And the students back then were dumber than the ones I had taught before. Now it's much worse. At the last school I taught at, I remember thinking at least half the class didn't belong in law school. The thought of them representing people in court and representing the bar made me shudder sometimes. I had many students who couldn't respond cogently to the Socratic method. I had one student cry and leave the room because I was too hard on her. But the lack of talent and intelligence has been much more pronounced in the last few years. I had several students who couldn't understand basic concepts. I had several who could barely speak intelligibly. It's a sad state of affairs. Just look at the bar pass rates.

    Don't believe all the nonsense about how the cases are the same and the workload is the same. It isn't. That’s just palpable resentment from law students who couldn’t get into a good school, and are looking to equate their education to those at good schools. It’s an inferiorty complex. Because they know they are inferior to those at the better schools. At the top schools, the students have to read more and they are smarter to begin with. They are also taught by better professors and are competing with better students for the best grades. They study much more and read much more, which makes them that much better than the dummies at the lower schools when they graduate. That’s why federal courts and large law firms don’t take many of those graduates.

    Here's the true test of whether a law school is worth it: would you recommend that law school to your children? If I were not well off I would not recommend any school outside of the top dozen to my daughters or to my nieces and nephews for that matter. No exceptions. I mean no exceptions. None. I don't care if it's for free or almost free. A degree from a lower school isn’t worth much out there. And in some cases it might limit your job opportunities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you considered doing an OpEd on that for your regional news organizations? Maybe your Bar Assn magazine if they have one? Kind of a tall order, but honestly, it's time for the Profs to start calling shenanigans.

      Delete
    2. I went to a school in the top 100. Barely. And I agree with what you said. I remember in crim law we were talking about incarceration rates around the world. And two stupid co-eds harped on the US having more people than most countries. Which is why there were so many in prison here. We were talking about rates, not total numbers. It was painful to watch. The professor just shook his head. He showed great restraint. He bit his tongue. But what would've been the point. A guy with a 160 IQ grilling two people who each had an IQ in the low 80s?

      Delete
    3. Thanks, 1:20. Teaching at a toilet school must indeed be awful. I wouldn't want to do it, and I have taught various subjects (including law).

      Your analysis is quite correct. I actually suggest that thirteen schools may deserve the consideration of the rich (http://outsidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.ca/2017/05/the-seven-tiers-of-law-schools.html), but I'm not going to quarrel with your number of twelve. People going to such mediocrities as Vanderbilt and UCLA for the "prestige" are inviting big trouble.

      You're right about the quality of education at the toilet schools: it's awful, notwithstanding the propaganda about using the same cases. The toilet schools teach a dumbed-down version of law. Many of them even use multiple-choice tests. At my élite school, exams required written answers, typically running to several pages each. I never saw a multiple-choice test.

      Perhaps I'm too generous, but I do believe that many of the professors even at the toilet schools are capable of teaching law adequately. But nobody can get through the skulls of the dumb students that dominate the toilet schools: they simply lack the intelligence, literacy, even background knowledge needed to obtain a proper legal education. When, as you say, they cannot understand basic comments or even speak articulately, they certainly cannot understand subtleties or produce careful legal analysis. So the schools that admit these dumb bunnies have to teach a dumbed-down, cookbook-style imitation of law. Well, the bar exams don't really require very much more than that, although competent legal practice does. So it's not surprising that so many graduates of La Toilette cannot pass a bar exam. As for a federal clerkship, forget it. The typical toileteer couldn't begin to write a bench memorandum.

      Even my élite law school had a handful of students who really were too dumb for law school. A couple of them admitted to being in over their heads.

      Delete
    4. Top 12 law schools? What complete b's. Most lawyers have small practices throughout the USA...and most do just fine handling the law without those fancy degrees. Most don't work in big law and don't want to, so why would anybody need the top 12 schools or so. Any regional or public law school will serve most people just fine given the types of practices most will have. Some of you are just elitists.

      Delete
    5. Those dumb asses at your toilet school, 7:36, should have been told that the US (population 0.320 billion) has more prisoners in absolute numbers than China and India combined (population 2.7 billion).

      On second thought, they should simply have been told to leave, as they're too damn dumb to understand basic concepts.

      Delete
    6. 8:20 Most lawyers don't do fine without big law experience and/ or fancy degrees.

      There are only 156,000 jobs in the US for self-employed lawyers, while there are 690,000 licensed lawyers not working in establishments. The median income for self-employed legal service workers was $53,000, according to the latest IRS data. If a lawyer does not have a job in an establishment, they are generally in a bad way. Sure, some grads of low tier schools are successful in bricks and mortar law firms, or even found those law firms. However, the numbers do not bear out the statement that most lawyers do just fine.

      Delete
  5. Law school was a bad idea 10 years ago. And these clowns are still lining up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bad idea 40 years ago-I am 40 years out-a life ruining mistake. "Suicide ideation" is a daily thought.

      The jury is still out. I need help and all I have approached for help just can't grasp my plight-the revolver sits on the mantle 10 feet from me.
      I am 64 and have almost no retirement income. There is no hope for me.

      So, good luck all you fools.

      C

      Delete
    2. I'm very sorry to hear of your suicidal ideation, 9:31. I'd listen to you if I could. I can only urge you to keep looking for someone who can understand you and help you. Please at least have a trusted person take care of that revolver for a while.

      For what it's worth, I too think that I have ruined my life by going into law. And, as I've said before, I was the star student at an élite law school, with fancy clerkships and law review and loads of other distinctions. In my few years at the bar I've gone through several marginal jobs, each worse than the last, and now I suspect that I shall soon be out of work altogether, with too little time left to do anything else. And I must admit to having thoughts similar to yours.

      Does this sound like a happy story, would-be law student? Do you expect to fare better with your half-ass grades from La Toilette Law School?

      Delete
    3. I don't know whether they still make the board game "Life." In that game, early on, you landed on a career that set your income for the duration. Doctor was the best, followed by lawyer. School teacher was the bottom, if memory served. If they still make the game I wonder whether lawyer is still the number 2 highest paying position. If so they are contributing to the underlying cultural problem of everyone thinking lawyers made boatloads of money, thereby encouraging wave after wave of lemmings over the cliff.

      Delete
    4. OG-

      My physician knows but is of little help, my sister a LCSW does not get it and is of no help, my spouse is of no help-I married for love and attraction, not Nobel Prize material (and that was great decision). So, I have to rely on my inherent strength which has carried me to this point.

      I did not go to and elite school, a top 25 school, was in the top 25%, wasn't on law review, no clerkship, found a law job 2.5 years after graduation.

      My "legal career" has been a horror. Met many nice people, moderately involved legal issues, yet a nightmare to get paid. I have written off hundreds of thousands of dollars of fees.

      I dont know how we might meet without putting it all on the internet. I am in the Indiana-Illinois-Iowa area.

      I am beyond distressed that someone with your credentials is struggling so.

      C

      Delete
  6. Note how few government and public service jobs were gotten. Those "less attractive jobs that we desperately need filled."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you for this letter. I wish I had seen something like it before I attended Hofstra. I remember their open house in 2009. Dean Demleitner painted such a wonderful picture of what it was like to be a lawyer. I looked at their website, too, and everything seemed wonderful. They had a high employment rate, and students were getting wonderful jobs. Little did I know that this was all a web of lies.

    Hofstra was a mediocre law school at best. Most of the professors were not interested in teaching. Half the time my classmates and I didn't know what was going on.

    I graduated in the top 50% of my class, but no job. I've made about $10,000 over the years as a lawyer. I wasn't the only one who had this experience. Many of my friends didn't get jobs either.

    Dean Demleitner and Hofstra ruined many lives. What do they care. They all got paid, and Demleitner became dean at Washington & Lee.

    You have used many derogatory words on this website for law schools, deans, and law professors. But here is the bottom line: these people are evil. Nora Demleitner is the worst person I have ever known in my life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was also at Hofstra during
      Nora Demleitner's reign as scam dean. Not only is she a congenital liar, she is very condescending to African-American students.

      Delete
    2. I graduated Hofstra Law almost 30 years ago. Some of my classmates made millions as attorneys and still do. Some are General Counsel to some well known corporations and making lots of money. But most of us make a living and nothing much more than that. Some never made it at all and had to find some other career path. I never liked the practice of law but there are days when it still makes me proud. Given the chance to go back in time I would not have chosen this career.

      Delete
    3. Well put: they're just plain evil. They knowingly exploit impressionable, desperate, ill-informed students and rip off the state as well, all for the sake of their own enrichment and self-aggrandizement. Their behavior should be considered criminal, and in some cases it may well be.

      Delete
  8. The admission stats are simply stunning. Yale has a 9% acceptance rate. But if you google easiest med schools to get into, the website startclass has a list that includes schools with a 9% acceptance rate. For instance, the Oklahoma College of Medicine (University of Oklahoma) has a 9.8% acceptance rate. The University of New Mexico School of Medicine has a 8.9% acceptance rate. Elite medical schools, such as Stanford or the Mayo Clinic, have acceptance rates of about 2%. The elite med schools also prefer students with PhDs or students pursuing a MD-PhD.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beyond that, medical schools screen people out through a heap of prerequisites: fairly challenging courses (chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics), documented experience in a medical setting, and so on. People who don't meet the requirements won't bother to apply, because doing so would be a waste of time and money.

      By contrast, law school requires nothing but any bachelor's degree and any LSAT score. Neither requirement is onerous, and some schools lift even those requirements (Cooley doesn't require a degree; several schools accept the GRE in lieu of the LSAT).

      Thus the selectivity of medical schools relative to law schools is understated. To improve the comparison, we would look at rates of admission if law schools required courses in, say, rhetoric and Latin prose composition, plus a few months of experience as an unpaid file clerk at the courthouse.

      Delete
  9. @1:20--"I had several students who couldn't understand basic concepts. I had several who could barely speak intelligibly."

    Yeah, because "diversity." You see, these toilets depend on policy makers for their very existence. The way they sell their particular brand of snake oil is by talking about how their student bodies are "diverse." That's how the pigs who started the University of North Texas (cUNT)Law School bilked the taxpayers out of $100 million.

    Well, since EVERY law school wants to be "diverse" now, all of the "diverse" applicants with half a brain are going to get snatched up by the "better" schools. That means that when you get down to TTT, TTTT, and TTTTT schools, you get drooling idiots who can't put a sentence together.

    The next logical step, to improve these schools bar passage rates is to whine about how the test is biased and keeping the legal profession from being more "diverse" and should be easier. Or maybe just do away with the barzam altogether, because if young "diverse" law graduates really WANT to be lawyers and warriors for justice and all, why should the old fogies at the state bars get in their way?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Diversity" became the watchword of toilet schools (and 90+% of law schools are toilets) only about seven years ago, when the bottom fell out of the law-school scam. Schools that previously had not given a tinker's damn about Black people or Latinos cynically embraced "diversity" just to tap the last underexploited group of people eligible for federally guaranteed student loans in any amount designated by the school.

      As 11:20 suggested, however, there is no real shortage of opportunity for racialized people with decent credentials, who typically get into the few schools that are conceivably worth attending. You see, Harvard and Yale, which within living memory didn't even admit women, are now eager to bring in a few racialized people so as not to look like the rich WASPy and Jewish enclaves that they in fact are. So they admit the scions of the tiny racialized aristocracy (every bit as privileged as its white counterpart) and then go after some racialized applicants who, though perfectly capable, would not have been admitted if they had been white. Thus Harvard and Yale grab up many of the students whom Columbia and Michigan (Tier 2) had wanted. Consequently, Tier 2 poaches from Tier 3, and Tier 3 gets most of the remaining racialized applicants who have any business going to law school. Tiers 4, 5, and 6 can only go after racialized people who are not cut out for the legal profession but unfortunately may be induced to believe that they can break through a racial barrier.

      The legal profession does need proportionally more racialized people, but admitting loads of unqualified applicants is no way to achieve that goal. It will only ruin the lives of those whom it allegedly helps—while enriching the hackademic fat cats.

      Delete
  10. A few harsh realities:
    1. Every single law school could close for the next 2 years, and still the GLUT of attorneys would not be resolved.
    2. As noted above, job prospects are poor, and the "public service" jobs applicants often say they want(even if the fact is these jobs wouldn't pay the bills, so forget loan payments) don't exist-as in, they aren't available because they aren't available and haven't been available for years. The few seemingly "public service" jobs-which are actually private employers, such as the ACLU-hire grads from top schools, period.
    3. The ABA is a very bad joke, and it exists solely to keep ABA accredited law schools in business. As noted above, it's gotten to the point with the TTTTs that it's open admissions, and to cover its tracks, the ABA is now allowing the GRE instead of the LSAT(for a lot of reasons, not the least of which there is no way to meaningfully compare LSAT and GRE scores), and soon it will be any standardized test, followed by no test requirement at all. The ABA is also standing silent as the respective state bar examiners are vilified by the scam deans, who are finding success in having bar passage rates lowered(e.g. California). And the ABA is actively working to undermine the employment statistics the law schools are required to report; if this goes through it will be virtually impossible to determine what % graduates are genuinely employed, and at what type of jobs and what type of salary.

    It's all a sham; Nando and the other scam bloggers have done amazing work, but the ABA has quietly set things up so that there will be a resurgence among the TTTTs.

    It's not a perfect comparison, but it is an instructive one: can anyone imagine the hue and cry is medical/pharmacy/dental/nursinig schools dropped their standards to make a quick buck like the TTTTs? Would the national licensing boards be watered-down to make this easier? Of course not; but in the case of law schools, it's happening and has been happening for years. It will be several more years before the sniping and finger pointing starts in earnest, and it will start with multiple widely reported appellate decisions lambasting clueless incompetent lawyers. And still the ABA will probably do nothing. It's all about money, and there is still too much money to be made in the scam for it to stop anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/the-law-schools-with-the-lowest-and-highest-acceptance-rates/

    On May 9, 2017, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry entitled “The Law Schools With The Lowest (And Highest) Acceptance Rates.” Read the following portion:

    "How can you measure a law school’s worth, aside from the employment statistics and bar passage rates of its graduates? Another telling sign of its success — or lack thereof — may be its acceptance rate. Generally speaking, law schools with low acceptance rates masterfully weathered the storm over the past decade, keeping their standards high during a time when applications plummeted and entering students’ qualifications sank, while law schools with high acceptance rates fared quite poorly, admitting almost anyone who applied in an effort to keep the lights on.

    But which law schools had the lowest acceptance rates and which ones had the highest acceptance rates? Thanks to the Short List blog of U.S. News, there’s a ranking for that. According to the Short List, the average acceptance rate in fall 2016 was 49.8 percent. Among the schools with the lowest acceptance rates, the rate was much, much lower, at 17.6 percent. As you may have guessed, the law schools with the lowest acceptance rates are some of the usual suspects, the elite schools found at the tippy top of the U.S. News rankings."

    The first chart shows the ten most selective law schools. The author continues:

    “What do things look like on the opposite side of the coin? For your daily dose of schadenfreude, we’ve done some research to present our readers with the top 10 law schools with the highest acceptance rates. Check them out:

    [The figures below represent full-time and part-time time applications for Fall 2016, full-time and part-time acceptances; acceptance rate; and U.S. News rank for 2018:]

    Thomas M. Cooley; 1,067; 915; 85.8 percent; RNP
    Loyola New Orleans; 711; 603; 84.8 percent; RNP
    Thomas Jefferson; 1,107; 915; 82.7 percent; RNP
    Vermont; 647; 524; 81 percent; 134 (tie)
    Capital; 528; 418; 79.2 percent; RNP
    Charleston; 1,165; 912; 78.3 percent; RNP
    Northern Kentucky; 420; 327; 77.9 percent; RNP
    Creighton; 903; 688; 76.2 percent; 120 (tie)
    Willamette; 507; 376; 74.2 percent; 142 (tie)
    Mitchell Hamline; 1,033; 750; 72.6 percent; RNP

    Cooley no longer has to settle for being the second-best law school in the country, because the school is finally the best at something. Congratulations, Cooley! As for the rest of the law schools with the highest acceptance rates, the fact that their admissions offices have to accept so many applicants in a world where law schools are merging or closing their doors is a bit… concerning.”

    Those acceptance rates are proof that these schools will pretty much take anyone with a pulse and student loan eligibility. Of the ten easiest diploma factories to get into, only seven are not in USN&WR’s fourth tier. Based on these figures, one has to wonder who Cooley denies in their deny admissions process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Twenty-five percent of last year's entering class at Cooley scored 138 or lower on the LSAT. That score is at percentile 9.6. Thus at least a quarter of the class at Cooley is in the bottom 10% of all people who took the LSAT last year.

      Consider also that the score of 138 represents only 34 correct answers on the 101-question LSAT. Haphazard guessing would be expected to produce 20 correct answers. One could blindly record the answer "D" to every question, spend the remaining 2½ hours puzzling out the answers to a dozen or so of the easiest questions, and score 138.

      According to the president and dean of Cooley, however, no score on the LSAT should be considered too low (https://web.archive.org/web/20150126012556/cooley.edu/commentary/abuses_of_LSAT_scores.html). "[T]hose who would deny anyone who has graduated from college the opportunity to fulfill a dream based on an LSAT cut-off score are elitist, paternalistic, and ignorant of the purpose of the very test they rely upon as the basis for their denial". Oddly enough, this statement is gone from Cooley's Web site; I had to dig it up through archives.

      The statement shows the scamsters' lack of scruples. LeDuc resorts to emotional pleas about an individual's "dream" by way of avoiding the important point about basic ability. He cannot believe his own bullshit propaganda, and that's probably why Cooley took down that embarrassing defense of admitting people with abysmal LSAT scores.

      Delete
    2. Dean Don LeDuc here to defend my law school. I'm tired of everyone mocking Cooley. I have successfully turned Cooley into the #2 ranked law school in the country. Cooley is an "access" school that provides an opportunity to practice law for underserved students. The school has rigorous standards of admission. The following standards are applied to ALL applicants:

      1) Eligible for federal student loans or other financial means to pay tuition.
      2) Sat for LSAT and filled in name correctly.
      3) Submitted a completed application with undergrad transcripts.
      4) Not a sex offender.

      Anyone meeting these rigorous standards is granted admission. Keep in mind, Cooley has a reputation to maintain. Cooley is a gateway to an NHL coaching career. How many Harvard or Yale law grads are coaching in the NHL? Let alone lead a team to the Stanley Cup Finals! It's not too late to apply. We are still accepting applicants for the fall semester.

      Delete
    3. Keep up the good work, Don. Harvard is teetering on its throne!

      Delete
  12. How can Thomas Jefferson sol accept 83% of applicants when bar exam passage has been 31% and 24%, respectively, the last 2 testings?

    Unconscionable that the ABA, DoE and the state of CA allow this!


    ReplyDelete
  13. That list actually contains quite a few surprises. Who would have guessed that Appalachian and Florida International have lower acceptance rates than NYU, BU, USC and Notre Dame? Not me. I realize that the quality of applicants is vastly different, but still. Also, not all bad schools have gone the Cooley route and adopted open admission policies. For example, Touro - which is the very definition of a toilet school - rejects as many applicants as it accepts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bear in mind that Appalachian last year was down to 38 first-year students. Yes, it admitted only 28% of the applicants. But its LSAT scores slide three points from the previous year, and only Cooley and Arizona Summit are (slightly) lower. So the relatively low rate of admissions does not indicate a selective policy. On the contrary, it seems that hardly anybody wants to attend a moribund toilet school in the coal-mining town of Bumblefuck, Virginia, and that Appalachian is hit up largely by applicants so manifestly lousy that admitting even a few more of them would leave Appalachian with the unwanted distinction of having the lowest LSAT scores. Thus Appalachian turns large numbers of applicants away. But even the ones that it admits are fucking awful.

      Delete
  14. Hello All,

    I'm an attorney in San Francisco.

    As you know the CA State Bar is considering "lowering the cut off" score for the Bar exam.

    http://calbar.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=204

    I am attaching a link to the "public hearing" webcast. What an increasable "dog and pony show". What a pretentious precast production.

    Remember, California has 1 attorney per 176 per capita. Compare: Japan 1 attorney per 1100 per capita.

    Run for the hills!

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=1202795600053/Do-We-Really-Want-to-Make-It-Easier-to-Go-to-Law-School?slreturn=20170724070413

    Vivia Chen’s brilliant article, “Do We Really Want to Make It Easier to Go to Law School?,” appeared in the American Lawyer – on August 15, 2017. Truly, this is a remarkable piece – and should be required reading for everyone considering law school. Here is the full text below:

    “Can we cut through the bull about why law schools are now accepting GREs for admission? The fact is that applications are falling, and law schools are desperate for hot bodies to fill their empty seats. (Law schools that now accept the GRE include Harvard, Northwestern and Georgetown, reports The National Law Journal; the first school to do so was the University of Arizona.)

    Not for one minute do I buy the argument that law schools are now realizing that LSATs aren't the end-all/be-all predictor of future success. As for the argument that allowing the GRE for law school admission will attract more hot commodities such as math and science types to apply: Puh-leeze.

    If you're a bright young thing with quantitative or tech abilities, there are less painful ways to make a decent living. As any fourth grader in New York knows, the legal profession kinda sucks. They see how hard lawyer-parents work (compared to those hedge fund parents who have more fun and make a lot more moolah). And they know it's damn impossible to become equity partner in Big Law these days.

    "The Golden Age for law schools is definitely over," says Paul Caron, dean of Pepperdine Law School. "Harvard and the other schools that have jumped on the GRE bandwagon are undoubtedly seeking to expand their pool of potential students."

    So, you might ask, if the pool is shrinking, what do I have against using the GRE to lure a wider array of candidates, especially those smarties who never dreamed of going to law school? To me, the answer is obvious: They shouldn't go to law school precisely because they didn't have an inkling to go in the first place. I mean, aren't there already enough people in the profession who lack passion for practice? Walk down the hall of any major law firm, and you find plenty of miserable, lost souls who'd rather be bricklayers or baristas.

    I know because I was one of them. Like a lot of liberal arts majors, I went to law school because it seemed like such a respectable default. Even with the filter of the LSAT, there are too many of us who end up in law who have no business there. (Note to English majors: Don't believe it when people tell you that writing well will make you a natural fit for law practice. Trust me, legal writing is a different animal.)

    For all those literature, history and art majors out there, the LSAT is the only thing that offers a taste of what it means to "think like a lawyer." I'm talking primarily about the logical reasoning sections—the stuff that few liberal arts majors encounter during four years of college. As Kellye Testy, president of the Law School Admission Council (it administers the LSAT), pointed out to NLJ's Karen Sloan: "Analytical reasoning is 25 percent of the LSAT and zero percent of the GRE. Logical and critical reasoning skills are 50 percent of the LSAT, and zero percent of the GRE."

    If those topics sound dreary and make you want to dodge the LSATs, then maybe that should tell you something.

    So here's where I stand: Limit law school admissions to that awful, forbidding LSAT. Let there be more, not fewer, barriers to going to law school. (Perhaps include psychological testing, too?) That might sound restrictive and undemocratic, but people will be happier for it. Believe me.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I cannot let this stinking bullshit pass without comment: "As any fourth grader in New York knows, the legal profession kinda sucks. They see how hard lawyer-parents work (compared to those hedge fund parents who have more fun and make a lot more moolah). And they know it's damn impossible to become equity partner in Big Law these days."

      Chen exudes upper-crusty urban let-them-eat-cake arrogance. First of all, Chen, not all of us come from New York. I never saw the city, or even the state, until adulthood. Second, as a fourth-grader I knew nothing about the legal profession and had not even heard of a hedge fund. Third, as a child I never encountered "lawyer-parents", still less "hedge fund parents". I was in my twenties before I met a lawyer. Fourth, plenty of fourth-graders in New York don't rub elbows any more than I did with equity partners and hedge-fund parasites. Fifth, "a lot more moolah" isn't everyone's purpose in life, believe it or not.

      I encountered your snooty-ass attitude over and over again from the cocksure scions of the aristocracy that dominated my élite law school. When I couldn't get an interview, classmates half my age told me that I must have known when I went into law school that I'd never get a job at my age. No, I didn't know that employers wouldn't consider me, up at the top of the class, but would snap up mediocre rich kids like you. How does your twentyish jive ass know so goddamn much about practices in the legal profession when you've never even had a job?

      Some of us, unlike you, elected law not "because it seemed like such a respectable default" but because we damn well wanted to practice law. Patrician respectability was far from my thoughts—but I'm just a hayseed from Bumblefuck who never had "moolah" nor hung around the offices of a hedge fund in Manhattan. Rotten people like you who indeed "have no business" in law are largely responsible for the degradation of the legal profession.

      And if you think that "writing well" typifies "English majors", you don't know what you're talking about.

      Go fuck yourself.

      Delete
    2. hey, can I just say thanks for saying that. Growing up in NYC, I didn't know a "lawyer parent" or a "hedge fund parent"... Never even heard of a hedge fund until my 20s...
      most of us here in NYC are just struggling to get by (as gentrifiers rapidly take over our city and push us out). and in my case, having this internal law school debate.
      Thought it might help me become comfortable, because I graduated college only to find out my degree has no value.
      And the more I'm reading online (just found this site), the more I'm leaning towards maybe not...

      Delete
    3. @ 7:54. Go to community college and get a technical certificate.

      Delete
  16. http://lawschooltruthcenter.blogspot.com/2017/08/classes-begin-letter-to-class-of-2020.html

    On August 23, 2017, the Law School Truth Center blog featured an entry labeled “Classes Begin: A Letter to the Class of 2020.” Review this segment:

    “Dear Class of 2020:

    You're likely back at law school now. You've begun a three-year suborgasm and a forty year super-orgasm. In three years' time, most of you will be starting jobs as BigLaw lawyers, federal prosecutors, or judicial clerks.

    At the same time, you're already behind, if only by a hair.

    Look at this SuperLawyer in the making!

    Now [Aaron Parnas] is entering George Washington University Law School at age 18, with hopes of one day becoming president.

    Parnas told Law.com that he has wanted to go into law school since he was about 10 or 11 years old, though he didn’t know what kind of law he wanted to practice. He volunteered in Donald Trump’s election campaign, and the election spurred his interest in a political career. “I felt like law school was the perfect stepping stone to that goal,” he said.

    Yeah, remember when Donald Trump graduated from college at 18, snapped his fingers, and headed to law school inspired by the example of... JFK, I suppose?

    It'll be just like that.

    I don't bring up our li'l' Doogie Howser here to discourage you all, but you should probably get used to the fact that law school (and lawyering, and life) is a massive pyramid scheme competition and if you don't know where you're at on the pyramid, you're a bottom bitch slave.

    The Good News is that even lawyer slaves make it rich and happy. Law school, with its focus on appellate law and reading cases from the 1920s, doesn't really prepare you for the euphoria of satisfaction with leaving work at 7:30 on a Friday after billing 60 hours in a week. But trust me, it's real, and way better than the stressful torpor these sadistic professors put you through.”

    Sadly, some lemmings will read those words and miss the sarcasm. Then again, when someone is intent on going to law school, they will not listen to reason or common sense. So why not go into serious student debt, for a TTTT law degree? It's only your financial future.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Not a day goes by when I don't say to myself that going to a law school was the very worst thing I have ever done. I will carry my six figure debt to my grave. A lifetime of debt. Calling the legal academia evil is proper and accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dear Class of 2020:

    You're likely back at law school now. Pack your bags immediately. Get out. Now. Save yourself. Save your family. Run! Scat! Get! Vamoose!

    Signed,

    Every unbiased, rational person in America

    ReplyDelete
  19. I'm not a law school student or grad, but I'm really tired of this fucking shit. When you get down to it, pretty much ALL of higher education is overpriced shit. In four years I will have two kids in college and will likely fork out well over $150K for each so they can...take their rightful places in soul-sucking jobs sitting in cubicles in front of computer screens with telephone headsets on, asking customers if they want to "upgrade" something for an additional $49.

    So, law school is just the tip of the massive Texas-sized iceberg that is the higher education SCAM. College tuition has increased exponentially in the past 20 years while the quality of the output has diminished. While students and their families leverage their future to pay for worthless degrees, universities keep hiring administrators and retaining faculty members who spend their days spewing ideology instead of actually teaching useful concepts.

    I have a friend from high school who is a professor in economics at a private university. Oh, he teaches a few classes and gets his grad-students to do the gruntwork for whatever he's working on to publish. But, despite his grueling schedule, he has plenty of time to run a property management business and provide expert testimony for plaintiffs' attorneys in personal injury lawsuits. So he gets an income and benefits that are paid for by the university's students and laughs all the way to the bank because he really spends most of his time on whatever he sees fit.

    The truth is, most of the available white-collar jobs now shouldn't require an expensive four-year university education. Four years of college to get a degree in "communications" or "marketing" or English Lit, so you can sell cars or work as a assistant manager at Best Buy? I live in a provincial city here in Texas where local leaders make a huge deal about "economic development" whenever they lure some firm into town that offers exciting opportunities schlepping packages, cutting up chickens, or waiting on tables. A few years back, they were so proud to bring in a big managed care firm because it offered "white collar" jobs for college grads. It was basically a big-ass call center with huge rooms full of cubicles where these lucky bastards could toil away, being monitored by supervisors and chided whenever they needed to go to the restroom.

    It's time for the mandatory four-year degree to be a thing of the past. It's time for a revolt against not only the law schools, but ALL of the academic-industrial complex!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have enjoyed my 30 year law career which has been exclusively representing the State as a prosecuting attorney; the last 10 years as the elected prosecutor in my county. That being said, it pains me greatly to see my "newbie deputies" struggling with upwards of $200k in law school debt. (My starting pay is $52k which is better than surrounding counties) They hope and pray that IBR culminating in federal loan remission after 10 years will ultimately allow them financial stability. I "guided" my own sons to work their tails off in high school for scholarships so they wouldn't have debt after graduating from our fine state STEM University. For my family, it worked. Oldest is mechanical engineer, youngest is soon to be an actuary. No law careers for them...

    ReplyDelete
  21. Experienced lawyer here who needs to change jobs. No jobs for me because almost all of the law firm jobs and in house jobs that I could meet the requisite experience for have experience limits that I do not nearly meet. I am much too experienced. My resume with an elite law school, elite college, big law, great experience has now been rejected from about 150 jobs in the last several months. I think the computer does this - my resume rarely gets to a human being. Even when it does, there are at least a dozen lawyers being called by the recruiter.

    If you want to be fully employed for career, you should really think about dropping out now. If you lose a job in middle age or older, you may lose the entire value of your law degree, as is happening to me. I have had a job to move from the entire job search, and still no in person interviews save for one government job I did not get.

    ReplyDelete

 
Web Analytics