EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
ps494
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:50 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby ps494 » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:44 pm

lawfool wrote:The first step could be something simple like a disclaimer that is required on ALL law school communications to applicants. Instead of from the Surgeon General, it should be from the Attorney General. Something like "Disclaimer: Applicants should carefully evaluate the (often manipulated) employment statistics with a skeptical mind before taking out mortgage-sized loans that will take 10-30 years to pay off. Assume you will not be in the top 10%." Require this in bold 20 pt font.

Maybe a 5 minute course after the LSAT ends to tell everyone the risks/rewards of various school tiers. :lol:



Seriously, someone needs to confront law schools and ask them how they can possibly think that it's ethical to intentionally deceive students. What in the hell could they possibly say? They clearly lure in applicants with bullshit, take their money, and then throw them out on the street.

User avatar
superserial
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:57 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby superserial » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:46 pm

it's ridiculous that people don't do enough research to figure this out before taking out 150K in loans.

ps494
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:50 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby ps494 » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:51 pm

superserial wrote:it's ridiculous that people don't do enough research to figure this out before taking out 150K in loans.



True, but it sounds like you're saying that you're fine with law schools trying to manipulate applicants.

User avatar
superserial
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:57 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby superserial » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:55 pm

ps494 wrote:
superserial wrote:it's ridiculous that people don't do enough research to figure this out before taking out 150K in loans.



True, but it sounds like you're saying that you're fine with law schools trying to manipulate applicants.


o rly?

User avatar
dudester
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:23 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby dudester » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:58 pm

Space_Cowboy wrote:
dudester wrote:Fifth post from the top.


Ah missed that. As I conceded, the 95+% reporting requirement was silly. Lets just go with those who don't report salary as earning $0. I'd rather bias the data toward lower salaries and give schools a very strong incentive to get complete information. The school can be eligible for GradPLUS loans but prospectives get to see how incomplete the data is. That good?


It would be irresponsible for schools to bias the information either way rather than just reporting the information they actually have, especially since people should be able to easily modify the data in the way you suggest if they wanted to.

Class size: 300
Response rate: 60%
Average salary: $80,000

----

Didn't respond: 120 students
New average salary: $48,000

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:24 pm

dudester wrote:
Space_Cowboy wrote:
dudester wrote:Fifth post from the top.


Ah missed that. As I conceded, the 95+% reporting requirement was silly. Lets just go with those who don't report salary as earning $0. I'd rather bias the data toward lower salaries and give schools a very strong incentive to get complete information. The school can be eligible for GradPLUS loans but prospectives get to see how incomplete the data is. That good?


It would be irresponsible for schools to bias the information either way rather than just reporting the information they actually have, especially since people should be able to easily modify the data in the way you suggest if they wanted to.

Class size: 300
Response rate: 60%
Average salary: $80,000

----

Didn't respond: 120 students
New average salary: $48,000


Thanks. I didn't know how math works. :D

Dude, they already bias the information by doing everything thing they can to follow up with only those graduates who were reportedly employed at graduation, while not bothering to check up on those that didn't have jobs at graduation. The response rates so salary data suck because schools don't want to collect data on the lower end.

Back to your introduction to mathematics example. Averages are terrible measures to gauge outcomes. Outliers (very high or very low salaries) distort the impression you get from a data set. Publish 25th percentile, median and 75th percentile salary data. That way, making non-reporters = $0 doesn't affect data too terribly (shifting the median instead of dragging down an average), unless we're talking about abysmal response rates, which, I'm sorry is indicative of a problem.

Is this an ideological block for you? You know, the second the evil government requires disclosure freedom is destroyed for all mankind, or something?

User avatar
dudester
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:23 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby dudester » Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:40 pm

Space_Cowboy wrote:
dudester wrote:
Space_Cowboy wrote:
dudester wrote:Fifth post from the top.


Ah missed that. As I conceded, the 95+% reporting requirement was silly. Lets just go with those who don't report salary as earning $0. I'd rather bias the data toward lower salaries and give schools a very strong incentive to get complete information. The school can be eligible for GradPLUS loans but prospectives get to see how incomplete the data is. That good?


It would be irresponsible for schools to bias the information either way rather than just reporting the information they actually have, especially since people should be able to easily modify the data in the way you suggest if they wanted to.

Class size: 300
Response rate: 60%
Average salary: $80,000

----

Didn't respond: 120 students
New average salary: $48,000


Thanks. I didn't know how math works. :D

Dude, they already bias the information by doing everything thing they can to follow up with only those graduates who were reportedly employed at graduation, while not bothering to check up on those that didn't have jobs at graduation. The response rates so salary data suck because schools don't want to collect data on the lower end.

Back to your introduction to mathematics example. Averages are terrible measures to gauge outcomes. Outliers (very high or very low salaries) distort the impression you get from a data set. Publish 25th percentile, median and 75th percentile salary data. That way, making non-reporters = $0 doesn't affect data too terribly (shifting the median instead of dragging down an average), unless we're talking about abysmal response rates, which, I'm sorry is indicative of a problem.

Space_Cowboy wrote:Is this an ideological block for you? You know, the second the evil government requires disclosure freedom is destroyed for all mankind, or something?


You're the one suggesting that federally imposed response rate requirements on employment surveys and/or deliberately skewing the data are good ideas just because some people are too lazy or dumb to use a calculator.

[quote="Space_Cowboy"] You know, the second the evil government requires disclosure freedom is destroyed for all mankind, or something?[/quote]

:?: I give up. Enjoy doc review after law school!

interestedbyestander
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:44 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby interestedbyestander » Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:40 pm

ntzsch wrote:"Taking into account retirements, deaths and that the bureau's data is pre-recession, the number of new positions is likely to be fewer than 30,000 per year. That is far fewer than what's needed to accommodate the 45,000 juris doctors graduating from U.S. law schools each year. "

So, 2/3 of J.D. grads are needed ITE?

this does not sound all that bad for someone at a T14 or T30 or T50, or even people with good ggrades basically anywhere, right?


The problem is that it affects everyone, aka Supply & Demand. The higher tier grads will be better off than the lower ... but top salaries have dropped, T14 grads are unemployed, the entire industry pays a price when an overall glut is created. And it is not getting better anytime soon no matter how much kids here try and believe it.

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:49 pm

dudester wrote:You're the one suggesting that federally imposed response rate requirements on employment surveys and/or deliberately skewing the data are good ideas just because some people are too lazy or dumb to use a calculator.


Way to ignore the fact that TTTs skew the data by only probing select graduates for salary data. Also, never mind that students don't get actual access to the data. They get a snapshot of a sample biased towards the higher salaries. I'd love to know on what planet this constitutes adequate disclosure.

User avatar
Hopefullawstudent
Posts: 427
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:35 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Hopefullawstudent » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:05 pm

The article? Economics FAIL. I hope the author is run over by common sense sometime in his life.

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:08 pm

Hopefullawstudent wrote:The article? Economics FAIL. I hope the author is run over by common sense sometime in his life.


That was quite insightful.....

User avatar
AngryAvocado
Posts: 776
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:22 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby AngryAvocado » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:11 pm

interestedbyestander wrote:
ntzsch wrote:"Taking into account retirements, deaths and that the bureau's data is pre-recession, the number of new positions is likely to be fewer than 30,000 per year. That is far fewer than what's needed to accommodate the 45,000 juris doctors graduating from U.S. law schools each year. "

So, 2/3 of J.D. grads are needed ITE?

this does not sound all that bad for someone at a T14 or T30 or T50, or even people with good ggrades basically anywhere, right?


The problem is that it affects everyone, aka Supply & Demand. The higher tier grads will be better off than the lower ... but top salaries have dropped, T14 grads are unemployed, the entire industry pays a price when an overall glut is created. And it is not getting better anytime soon no matter how much kids here try and believe it.


Bingo. All the "Screw the TTT people, they're getting what they paid for" obviously weren't paying attention to the whole of the article. This is less about individuals screwing themselves, and more about the ABA screwing the legal profession. Seeing as how we're all going into the legal profession, we all stand to benefit from a little more accountability for the ABA.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby D. H2Oman » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:15 pm

I wouldn't feel bad for someone who bought this house for $200,000, even if the real estate agent said it was a great deal.


--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby General Tso » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:16 pm

AngryAvocado wrote:
interestedbyestander wrote:
ntzsch wrote:"Taking into account retirements, deaths and that the bureau's data is pre-recession, the number of new positions is likely to be fewer than 30,000 per year. That is far fewer than what's needed to accommodate the 45,000 juris doctors graduating from U.S. law schools each year. "

So, 2/3 of J.D. grads are needed ITE?

this does not sound all that bad for someone at a T14 or T30 or T50, or even people with good ggrades basically anywhere, right?


The problem is that it affects everyone, aka Supply & Demand. The higher tier grads will be better off than the lower ... but top salaries have dropped, T14 grads are unemployed, the entire industry pays a price when an overall glut is created. And it is not getting better anytime soon no matter how much kids here try and believe it.


Bingo. All the "Screw the TTT people, they're getting what they paid for" obviously weren't paying attention to the whole of the article. This is less about individuals screwing themselves, and more about the ABA screwing the legal profession. Seeing as how we're all going into the legal profession, we all stand to benefit from a little more accountability for the ABA.


Are you really competing with Florida Coastal and Cooley grads for jobs? If you go to a T1 school and have above median grades, there is no way that a Top 10% T4 grad is going to beat you out.

User avatar
kswiss
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:58 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby kswiss » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:16 pm

Is there actually good info anywhere? It seems that given a list of a years graduates, and independent researcher charged with collecting the data could get employment stats for a school pretty easily. Maybe this is something that the ABA or LSAC conducted, then require that it be understood and signed before students are eligible for aid.

Edit: forgive the iPhone typing typos.
Last edited by kswiss on Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:18 pm

swheat wrote:Are you really competing with Florida Coastal and Cooley grads for jobs? If you go to a T1 school and have above median grades, there is no way that a Top 10% T4 grad is going to beat you out.


You are competing against them for legal work, though not directly.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby General Tso » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:18 pm

Dwaterman86 wrote:I wouldn't feel bad for someone who bought this house for $200,000, even if the real estate agent said it was a great deal.


--ImageRemoved--


What if the real estate agent colluded with an appraiser to overvalue a house, then deliberately withheld the fact that nearby houses had sold for over $100,000 less?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/business/22agent.html

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby D. H2Oman » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:20 pm

swheat wrote:
Dwaterman86 wrote:I wouldn't feel bad for someone who bought this house for $200,000, even if the real estate agent said it was a great deal.


--ImageRemoved--


What if the real estate agent colluded with an appraiser to overvalue a house, then deliberately withheld the fact that nearby houses had sold for over $100,000 less?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/business/22agent.html



Nope, still don't feel bad.

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby awesomepossum » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:27 pm

AngryAvocado wrote:
interestedbyestander wrote:
ntzsch wrote:"Taking into account retirements, deaths and that the bureau's data is pre-recession, the number of new positions is likely to be fewer than 30,000 per year. That is far fewer than what's needed to accommodate the 45,000 juris doctors graduating from U.S. law schools each year. "

So, 2/3 of J.D. grads are needed ITE?

this does not sound all that bad for someone at a T14 or T30 or T50, or even people with good ggrades basically anywhere, right?


The problem is that it affects everyone, aka Supply & Demand. The higher tier grads will be better off than the lower ... but top salaries have dropped, T14 grads are unemployed, the entire industry pays a price when an overall glut is created. And it is not getting better anytime soon no matter how much kids here try and believe it.


Bingo. All the "Screw the TTT people, they're getting what they paid for" obviously weren't paying attention to the whole of the article. This is less about individuals screwing themselves, and more about the ABA screwing the legal profession. Seeing as how we're all going into the legal profession, we all stand to benefit from a little more accountability for the ABA.



No, I totally saw that. What I'm saying is that the author isn't taking into account the stupidity of the students.

I'm actually all for the ABA regulating the shit out of law schools just like the AMA does ... restricting the number the number of schools and elevating the level of the profession.

However, the responsibility for people buying a worthless product on which there is plenty of information available still lies with the foolish purchasers. As long as the sellers aren't out and out lying about the service they're providing, you can't really blame them for what they're doing.

We have the right to be protected from fraud but we don't have the right to be protected from our own outright stupidity.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby General Tso » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:31 pm

awesomepossum wrote:
However, the responsibility for people buying a worthless product on which there is plenty of information available still lies with the foolish purchasers. As long as the sellers aren't out and out lying about the service they're providing, you can't really blame them for what they're doing.

We have the right to be protected from fraud but we don't have the right to be protected from our own outright stupidity.


Where is the 'plenty of information' located? Just a couple of weeks ago Yahoo ran an article that listed Lawyer as one of the top 5 jobs paying 75k or more. They also said you could make 75k working part time as a lawyer.

The average law student doesn't use TLS, let alone the average law applicant. I had never heard of ATL or any other legal blog before coming to TLS.

So where is the information overtly posted such that the typical law applicant would be well-informed?

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:35 pm

awesomepossum wrote:No, I totally saw that. What I'm saying is that the author isn't taking into account the stupidity of the students.

I'm actually all for the ABA regulating the shit out of law schools just like the AMA does ... restricting the number the number of schools and elevating the level of the profession.

However, the responsibility for people buying a worthless product on which there is plenty of information available still lies with the foolish purchasers. As long as the sellers aren't out and out lying about the service they're providing, you can't really blame them for what they're doing.

We have the right to be protected from fraud but we don't have the right to be protected from our own outright stupidity.


+1. They aren't lying, but they presenting people with employment data based on biased samples (pushing only those they knew were employed at graduation to respond with salary data - ask reasonable_man about this). And even then, you don't actually get the raw data (a simple chart with bins in $10k salary increments would be perfect). You get the snapshot (average, median, private sector median, private practice average, etc...) they chose to give you. Should people demand better information? Sure. But schools ought to be a lot more forthcoming with information.

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby awesomepossum » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:36 pm

swheat wrote:
awesomepossum wrote:
However, the responsibility for people buying a worthless product on which there is plenty of information available still lies with the foolish purchasers. As long as the sellers aren't out and out lying about the service they're providing, you can't really blame them for what they're doing.

We have the right to be protected from fraud but we don't have the right to be protected from our own outright stupidity.


Where is the 'plenty of information' located? Just a couple of weeks ago Yahoo ran an article that listed Lawyer as one of the top 5 jobs paying 75k or more. They also said you could make 75k working part time as a lawyer.

The average law student doesn't use TLS, let alone the average law applicant. I had never heard of ATL or any other legal blog before coming to TLS.

So where is the information overtly posted such that the typical law applicant would be well-informed?




google "law job prospects"

google "legal job market"

I know that google is some scary specialized software but a few folks use it.

User avatar
84Sunbird2000
Posts: 756
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 5:39 pm

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby 84Sunbird2000 » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:37 pm

jayzon wrote:Dear TLS,

The ABA has approved outsourcing some legal functions to countries like India. That means summer jobs, doc reviewers -- LAWYER JOBS - have been sent to a country not subject to those laws. This was done to benefit big firm partners, at the expense of thousands of regular attorneys.

AND YOU'RE ARGUING ABOUT T4 LAW SCHOOLS?

Either grow a pair and talk about the real way in which we're being pimped, or STFU.


TI one of several CRs

User avatar
Space_Cowboy
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:52 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby Space_Cowboy » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:40 pm

awesomepossum wrote:google "law job prospects"

google "legal job market"

I know that google is some scary specialized software but a few folks use it.


You don't think people are more likely to trust the information they get from a university than they find on some blog called "Big Debt Small Law?"

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Re: EDIT: LA Times Editorial: ABA treating you like cheap hooker

Postby awesomepossum » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:40 pm

Space_Cowboy wrote:
awesomepossum wrote:google "law job prospects"

google "legal job market"

I know that google is some scary specialized software but a few folks use it.


You don't think people are more likely to trust the information they get from a university than they find on some blog called "Big Debt Small Law?"



if you open your window a little more you can see more than one search result.

HTH




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: beancounter15, espressocream, patrickkpaul and 7 guests