"Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
NoJob
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:32 pm

"Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

Postby NoJob » Wed Mar 21, 2012 11:47 am

From Bernie Burk, a UNC law prof

http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2012/03 ... s-may.html

Nod to Campos for aggregating the info.
Last edited by NoJob on Wed Mar 21, 2012 11:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

NoJob
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: "Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

Postby NoJob » Wed Mar 21, 2012 11:48 am


User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: "Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

Postby spleenworship » Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:53 pm

Interesting. Not surprising, but interesting.

Why won't the ABA put on probation and eventually remove any school with less than 60% bar passage or less than 60% employment of full time permanent JD required at 9 months? Oh, wait... money... nevermind.

User avatar
splitbrain
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: "Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

Postby splitbrain » Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:15 pm

spleenworship wrote:Interesting. Not surprising, but interesting.

Why won't the ABA put on probation and eventually remove any school with less than 60% bar passage or less than 60% employment of full time permanent JD required at 9 months? Oh, wait... money... nevermind.

I think the rule is they have to have poor results 3 years in a row...I forget the specifics but I'll try and dig it up later if I have time.

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: "Things May Be Even Worse Out There Than We Imagined"

Postby spleenworship » Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:34 pm

splitbrain wrote:
spleenworship wrote:Interesting. Not surprising, but interesting.

Why won't the ABA put on probation and eventually remove any school with less than 60% bar passage or less than 60% employment of full time permanent JD required at 9 months? Oh, wait... money... nevermind.

I think the rule is they have to have poor results 3 years in a row...I forget the specifics but I'll try and dig it up later if I have time.



Yeah, but I bet they'd take any data thrown at them the next two years, no matter how doctored, in order to keep a school in. They don't want to un-accredit schools.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bs118, MSNbot Media, mtf612, splitterfromhell and 5 guests