vcap180 wrote:curry1 wrote:Rahviveh wrote:guybourdin wrote:blerggggg wrote:How much do you guys think the ABA is to blame for all of this? LSAC is one thing but doesn't ABA have the discretion to say, "no you're obviously a diploma mill, we won't accredit you." Or something among those lines?
I'm not sure how much this would help, but LSAC should like email you a school's ABA employment disclosures after you apply or something along those lines. We know they exist, but I'm not sure how many of these 3Ls saw that less than 1 in 6 people from the school became lawyers the year before they decided to attend. As has been pointed out by others: simply having the internet only takes you so far. Ultimately, these kids ruined their own lives, but they should have received a little more resistance from somebody! Does the ABA or LSAC have a guide they send to all UG prelaw advisors just letting them know these types of disclosures exist? I'd imagine the well-meaning professor who signed up to be a schools prelaw advisor because they had literally no one else willing to do it wouldn't mind a little help.
Did you watch the video? It wouldn't help. These people don't believe in statistics. Law students in general even a top schools are terrible at understanding stats and numbers.
The only solution is shut these places down so they can't attend
yeah, people need to stop blaming those who attend terrible law schools. Even "smart" people cannot understand basic stats and paternalism is actually justified in this situation dealing with people who can't even break 150 on the LSAT.
It's not even a matter of statistics, it comes down to basic self-awareness - if you're maxing out at a 146 LSAT score, you need to accept that this career path isn't for you. I feel bad for almost no TTTTTTTTT students.
It's not a matter of statistics, or numbers. We have to understand what place certain professions have in the American imagination. Yes, today we (people on this forum) look at the legal profession through a dystopian shade and scoff at the notion that it can guarantee a good upper middle class existence. But the conclusion which the vast majority of TLSers correctly draw has not seeped into the general American imagination, especially in low-income and immigrant communities. (Even if we look at the lowering number of applicants, I would argue that a shift towards tech has fueled decrease rather than some realization that the legal profession is not a guaranteed ticket to the top.)
I'm a first generation immigration and I can tell you my parents look at being a doctor, lawyer, etc. as golden tickets in a sense. And why shouldn't they? Forget confirmation bias, there's confirmation of 100 years of American history. Similarly, we can look at the recent sub-prime mortgage crisis. I applaud anyone who has an unbreakable, indelible spirit of self-awareness you reference, but if the opportunity presents itself so I can buy a house, which has been the avenue for mobility, I'll probably take it, especially considering purported objective experts letting me know I qualify (i.e. admissions staff letting people with 140s in to law school).
ABA is at fault. Tighten up accreditation. We should have more minority and poorer applicants, but let's get create pipelines that encourage success and not profiteering.