Kansas Law Admissions Dean Answers Your Questions Forum

[reasonable person]

CORRECTION - Thanks to LST for placing us in the top third of a list of law schools sorted by their LST score and assigned a number corresponding to their placement on this list.

Just no.
There's a reason why LST doesn't rank.

[JayhawkLaw]

@sbl

That's an interesting analysis on the history of scholarship negotiations. You are right that a few years ago, it was very rare to negotiate awards. Perhaps if a school was just near a target, they'd reach out to students who were on the fence with a higher offer. Or some intrepid students would ask for an increase, and a few schools would respond.

Between TLS and the increased competition between law schools for a smaller applicant pool, the amount of negotiating has skyrocketed. While we used to allow students to negotiate, last year we stopped doing so. While I don't have any problem with students asking, it did result in unfair outcomes. Basically, students who were more into "the game" were getting higher offers, with other students being left out. It was becoming an unfair, unmanageable process.

One problem was transparency. We believe in transparency in the criteria for awarding scholarships, and this process involved a lot murky waters. As negotiating became less of an occasional thing, and more of a standard feature of the process, we were faced with a decision. If we wanted to continue allowing for negotiation, we felt we should notify all applicants that they could do so. That probably would have been a mess, as just about everyone would ask for more and we'd upset a lot of people by saying no. So last year we decided to stop negotiating scholarships. We were a bit nervous, but it worked out just fine and we had a very strong incoming class. From what you are reporting, perhaps other schools are coming to the same conclusion.

I should note that this policy assumes that we will continue to be successful with this policy. We may be brave, but we're not crazy and if the policy is not working, then we may change course. However, if we do change the policy, students will be notified of the process so that it will be fair to all.

[thisismyname]

I apologize if this is off topic... But with all of the shots fired against Dean Freedman, I'd like to even the playing field a little. (1) I think it is awesome that a law school dean is willing to do this. And not just once, but what... the last 3 years? Look it up. He has been on this thread taking questions since he started as Dean of the school. I thought TLS WANTED more transparency. Yeah, maybe he is still giving some answers with data your don't necessarily agree with. But at least he's not resorting to throwing websites and pamphlets in your face when you have legitimate questions. (2) It's hard to believe that KU dropped about 50 students in the same year UMKC gained about 30 and believe KU only dropped because they were forced to. Therefore, I think that schools like these that understand the problem and are taking their own steps to fix it should be commended. (3) Finally, I hope that other Deans don't find this thread and choose not to post. If I were looking for schools right now, I would have legitimately considered KU simply because of this thread. And also that it's really a decent choice for its COA.

I do have a question, just out of curiosity. I'm a firm believer that rankings don't matter (to a certain extent), but with your recent jump in ranking, have you had nice jump in more qualified applicants? Or is the economy still hitting law schools in your area? Again, I can't thank you enough for setting the standard that other Deans might do this same thing!

[Birdnals]

OP: Can you tell me if your admissions office still feels the below writer should be blackballed from all 200 law schools for this admittedly immature and rude response to your fee waiver emails in the winter of 2011?

[qlinault]

[20160810]

[A. Nony Mouse]

This is still in the on-topics, folks.

[AReasonableMan]

OP: Can you tell me if your admissions office still feels the below writer should be blackballed from all 200 law schools for this admittedly immature and rude response to your fee waiver emails in the winter of 2011?

Going to keep this on topic by how I phrase the question:

If part of your school's business model is to get a list of LSAT test takers, and solicit them through e-mail then aren't you essentially a telemarketer acting on behalf of KU? Clearly the above response shows the writer has some growing up to do, but in private e-mail conversations not related to factual statements, isn't there an expectation of privacy? If you are going to spam private individuals and use their replies to the spam as weapons against them, shouldn't you have a disclaimer that they shouldn't expect to have privacy? It seems odd that you can on one hand correctly label the writer's lack of tact, but on the other hand display similar lack of tact in taking measures to tangibly harm that individual.

I have a lot of respect for what admissions officers do and they are largely the gatekeepers of our profession, but within the context of chain mailing from a list, how are you any different than Publisher's Clearing House and why do you expect special treatment? What is the statute of limitations on a defamation claim in Kansas or this applicant writer's state?

[JayhawkLaw]

My guess is Birdnals is the student who sent this e-mail, or at least a close friend (how else would he get that e-mail?) Clearly this is a personal issue for the student who is unwilling to take responsibility for his actions.

The e-mail was beyond unprofessional, it was threatening. Imagine if someone working at a law firm sent such an e-mail to a client, opposing counsel, or a judge? I do not believe there is an expectation of privacy when someone sends an e-mail of this nature. For the record, I only forwarded the e-mail to the schools I knew he had applied to and only after I waited for his response to my e-mail. I was expecting he would apologize and explain it was a stupid mistake on his part. At which point I would have accepted the apology and done nothing. Instead, his response was as obnoxious and unprofessional as the first one, at which point I shared the e-mails with just those schools.

My advice to everyone - the law is a profession, be professional at all times.

[Sheriff]

Can you guys post the reply, if you have it? Because although the person who sent that email comes across as an immature moron, I don't see anything there above harmless college football fanboy banter. Certainly nothing to ruin someone's career over. Just my opinion.

[Rigo]

My guess is Reasonable Man or Birdnals is the student who sent this e-mail, or at least a close friend (how else would they get that e-mail?) Clearly this is a personal issue for the student who is unwilling to take responsibility for his actions.

The e-mail was beyond unprofessional, it was threatening. Imagine if someone working at a law firm sent such an e-mail to a client, opposing counsel, or a judge? I do not believe there is an expectation of privacy when someone sends an e-mail of this nature. For the record, I only forwarded the e-mail to the schools I knew he had applied to and only after I waited for his response to my e-mail. I was expecting he would apologize and explain it was a stupid mistake on his part. At which point I would have accepted the apology and done nothing. Instead, his response was as obnoxious and unprofessional as the first one, at which point I shared the e-mails with just those schools.

My advice to everyone - the law is a profession, be professional at all times.

Don't deans have a greater expectation of professionalism and maturity than some 22 year old kid?
The only threat from the e-mail chain is made by the dean. It's so bizarre and petty and really makes me question the institutional priorities as well as the lack of judgement and impulse control of the deans at KU.

Obviously this e-mail is tangential to the point of this thread, but the Dean addressed it and thus opened the door.

[A. Nony Mouse]

No more questions or comments about Birdnals' e-mail, please. It's off-topic and simply stirring up bad blood at this point. Please keep the thread to questions about KU Law. If you have any concerns about this limitation, PM me or raise them in the Mod Q&A thread - don't hash them out here.

[JayhawkLaw]

Regarding fee waiver e-mails. We certainly send out such e-mails, it's a great tool to put Kansas on the radar of students who may not have us on their screen. To guard against sending unwanted e-mails, we only send e-mails to students who have registered with LSAC and opted-in to receive communications from law schools, or to students who have filled out information cards during school visits or law school sponsored events. There is also an opt-out button on the e-mails that allows students to take their name off our mailing list.

For these reasons, we're quite comfortable sending these e-mails and have found them to be very helpful. Every year I speak to 1Ls who tell me they would never have thought of KU if it weren't for the e-mail.

[jenesaislaw]

Steve, I have a question about fee waivers. Who do you target with them?

I wish we could get answers from all admissions staff on this question.

[lacrossebrother]

My guess is Birdnals is the student who sent this e-mail, or at least a close friend (how else would he get that e-mail?) Clearly this is a personal issue for the student who is unwilling to take responsibility for his actions.

The e-mail was beyond unprofessional, it was threatening. Imagine if someone working at a law firm sent such an e-mail to a client, opposing counsel, or a judge? I do not believe there is an expectation of privacy when someone sends an e-mail of this nature. For the record, I only forwarded the e-mail to the schools I knew he had applied to and only after I waited for his response to my e-mail. I was expecting he would apologize and explain it was a stupid mistake on his part. At which point I would have accepted the apology and done nothing. Instead, his response was as obnoxious and unprofessional as the first one, at which point I shared the e-mails with just those schools.

My advice to everyone - the law is a profession, be professional at all times.

Do you know that Kansas and Missouri are rivals and this obviously the email was sent to be funny? Don't you think that there's room for humor in the practice of law? If a Yale grad sent that email to Harvard, do you think Harvard would take it so personally? Do you think that insecurity perhaps clouded your ability to take things lightly and appropriately?

user has been banned for continuing this discussion in this thread

[AReasonableMan]

My guess is Birdnals is the student who sent this e-mail, or at least a close friend (how else would he get that e-mail?) Clearly this is a personal issue for the student who is unwilling to take responsibility for his actions.

The e-mail was beyond unprofessional, it was threatening. Imagine if someone working at a law firm sent such an e-mail to a client, opposing counsel, or a judge? I do not believe there is an expectation of privacy when someone sends an e-mail of this nature. For the record, I only forwarded the e-mail to the schools I knew he had applied to and only after I waited for his response to my e-mail. I was expecting he would apologize and explain it was a stupid mistake on his part. At which point I would have accepted the apology and done nothing. Instead, his response was as obnoxious and unprofessional as the first one, at which point I shared the e-mails with just those schools.

My advice to everyone - the law is a profession, be professional at all times.

I would never send that e-mail, and don't appreciate that accusation. I don't disagree that it was very unprofessional and that they shouldn't have sent it. If I were an employer, I probably would not want to hire someone who'd send such an email because I'd have serious concerns about their judgment (incurring risks that cannot benefit them or anyone else).

But you took what was a rude and unprofessional e-mail, and came back with a response in an attempt to personally harm that individual is a very disproportionate response.

With all respect, it is pretty rude to accuse me of having ties with the individual who sent that e-mail. The response would offend most people. Even wild dogs have a biological impulse to intervene when one of two dogs in a scuffle resorts to fighting tactics that are disproportionate. This is a basic mammalian response. Can you not see that responding to a callously and condescending e-mail with physical acts intended to harm the writer's foreseeable future is disproportionate?

user has been banned for continuing this discussion after being told not to. There are other threads where this is being discussed and the PM function still works if anyone wants to discuss this personally with the OP.

[JayhawkLaw]

Things are getting a little crazy on this thread, so now would be the perfect time to remind everyone it's the holiday season.

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah & Kwanzaa and happy everything else you may be celebrating. I hope everyone has the chance to spend time with friends and family and to enjoy the holiday.

Best Wishes,

Steve F.

[2014]

If all ~120 slots in your incoming class were filled with Kansas residents (or those eligible for in-state tuition like KCMO students) would you face budgetary issues?

The reason I ask is that in-state tuition is low and seems to make sense for those wanting to work in Kansas or many who want to work in KC, but is it only low because it is subsidized by a certain percentage of your class that are out of staters? If so that seems troublesome since those students are surely at least on average less competitive for the jobs that KU is best equipped to place grads in. If true, this isn't a KU specific problem imo, it probably applies to most out of region students applying to most law schools in most states.

[03152016]

actually 2014, as the dean has explained before, ku is a great choice for applicants from out-of-state



with a "smart job search strategy", ku students can land in top firms in nyc, chi, d.c., and even pheonix
but beware, you'll need to do well in law school and put in a lot of hard work
so you should only pursue this route if you think you'll do well in law school and you're willing to work hard!

since this is a q&a, my question for the dean:
at nine months, was the number of students from the class of 2013 who landed in biglaw higher or lower than the number of students from that class who were completely unemployed?

do you think posts like the one you wrote above have the potential to mislead prospective students?

[lacrossebrother]

I'd like to enter my final thoughts on this thread to say that it actually was incredibly enlightening to have a law school dean come here and entertain us with an inside baseball look at the running a law school. It really does seem like despite many posters preconceptions, not only do the various heads of law schools around the country do genuinely believe in their products, but those products actually serve a very meaningful and positive role. I would hope that despite some of the derision Steve faced in this thread, his honesty and willingness to share reflects positively upon his school, and that other deans are encouraged in the future to take a similar path. I would think that the birdnals side-track, albeit funny, and in my opinion, inappropriate and regrettable response by Steve, may be viewed eventually as merely an anecdote on this type of thread and it won't dissuade productive discussions like this from occurring again in the future.

[Birdnals]

OP, maybe you should look at those emails and the negative impression they may give potential applicants about your office as a "teachable moment", as the saying goes?

Because while I was a 22 year old sending an immature email trying to elicit a laugh (which would be my response is a kU grad sent a similar email to me), you are an admissions dean at a law school who sent multiple immature emails from your position of power trying to ruin that 22 year old's career.

I did end up posting the e-mails to those top-law-schools.com, but to the best of my memory, I didn't offer any editorial content. I left it up to my colleagues to make conclusions about the content. My guess is that they will have hardly any effect on your applicants for admission. If I remember, you were a strong law school, I'm sure applicants would take you with the understanding you would likely develop a little more professional sense during your time in admissions.



Oh, and Merry Christmas!

[TTRansfer]

Steve, I have a question about fee waivers. Who do you target with them?

I wish we could get answers from all admissions staff on this question.

I am genuinely curious about this myself. Hope the Dean can answer this one when he has a second.

[fats provolone]

what are some good ways to work hard and do well in law school?

[AReasonableMan]

actually 2014, as the dean has explained before, ku is a great choice for applicants from out-of-state



with a "smart job search strategy", ku students can land in top firms in nyc, chi, d.c., and even pheonix
but beware, you'll need to do well in law school and put in a lot of hard work
so you should only pursue this route if you think you'll do well in law school and you're willing to work hard!

since this is a q&a, my question for the dean:
at nine months, was the number of students from the class of 2013 who landed in biglaw higher or lower than the number of students from that class who were completely unemployed?

do you think posts like the one you wrote above have the potential to mislead prospective students?

On his behalf, the formal logic statement of this is that if you land top firms in these places then you must have done well and worked hard in the job search. If applicants can't understand that according to this logic statement, they can do both of these things and still be begging for change on the corner then they really shouldn't be going to law school.

[cotiger]

actually 2014, as the dean has explained before, ku is a great choice for applicants from out-of-state

with a "smart job search strategy", ku students can land in top firms in nyc, chi, d.c., and even pheonix
but beware, you'll need to do well in law school and put in a lot of hard work
so you should only pursue this route if you think you'll do well in law school and you're willing to work hard!

since this is a q&a, my question for the dean:
at nine months, was the number of students from the class of 2013 who landed in biglaw higher or lower than the number of students from that class who were completely unemployed?

do you think posts like the one you wrote above have the potential to mislead prospective students?

Actually he didn't say it was a great choice for out-of-state students, just that it was possible to find employment out of the region. Which it is. And he added the caveat that those students who did find out-of-area jobs had to have good grades and put a lot of work into the job search. Which indicates, you know, that it's not easy.

How is that misleading?

They even made the 509 into an easily digestible infographic that also includes all NALP data: http://law.ku.edu/employment-statistics

Fucking lol at this "How do you sleep at night?!?" shit towards a state flagship that charges $20k/yr with 120 person classes.