TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
bigkahuna2020
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:12 am

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby bigkahuna2020 » Thu Feb 24, 2011 9:56 pm

A'nold wrote:
crazycanuck wrote:Having lots of schools with lots of students who have to work hard and compete for jobs isn't the problem, I would even go so far as to say it's healthy for the legal profession. What IS the problem is charging 50k+ per year in tuition alone.

Graduates should have to do extremely well to get the good jobs, but limiting legal education is not the answer.


Compare two other schools though: MBA schools and MD. People can get an MBA from like University of Phoenix online and an MBA outside of top schools impresses nobody. An MD impresses regardless of where it is earned and there is a high demand for medical doctors.


An MD is also far more concrete a practicum degree. It is a pretty base practitioner's degree, like an engineering or nursing or to be honest, HVAC certification

MBA, Master's, JD, and PhD's are at least theoretically, research or academic degrees (I know the MBA is not supposed to be, but let's be honest, it is effectively an amalgamation of relatively straightforward concepts from other fields seen through the lens of business.

Omerta
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 6:47 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby Omerta » Fri Feb 25, 2011 1:23 am

My personal theory/policy idea on how to diminish the number of J.D.s without running into anti-trust issues is have academic requirements attached to taking out federally guaranteed student loans. You would need (1) 3.5+ G.P.A. OR (2) 164+ LSAT to qualify for any federal loan. That way splitters and reverse splitters are not screwed. Yeah, there are still going to be 3.6 152 people applying and whatever, but it would really foreclose the bottom feeders.

I find it hard to believe that Wells Fargo or Sallie Mae would give an unguaranteed loan to someone attending a TTTT. Yeah, some people are going to be idiots and have their parents co-sign or use money from work to pay their way through, but I think those requirements would cut a fair percentage of people out without being unduly fair to people who suck at standardized tests or didn't really try in college.

flcath
Posts: 1502
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby flcath » Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:01 am

Omerta wrote:My personal theory/policy idea on how to diminish the number of J.D.s without running into anti-trust issues is have academic requirements attached to taking out federally guaranteed student loans. You would need (1) 3.5+ G.P.A. OR (2) 164+ LSAT to qualify for any federal loan. That way splitters and reverse splitters are not screwed. Yeah, there are still going to be 3.6 152 people applying and whatever, but it would really foreclose the bottom feeders.

I find it hard to believe that Wells Fargo or Sallie Mae would give an unguaranteed loan to someone attending a TTTT. Yeah, some people are going to be idiots and have their parents co-sign or use money from work to pay their way through, but I think those requirements would cut a fair percentage of people out without being unduly fair to people who suck at standardized tests or didn't really try in college.

Something's gotta give eventually, obviously.

In the meantime, there has got to be a way to get rid of the for-profits, right? Right now, everytime I hear a professor or the casebook author or anyone else talk about "honor," "integrity," "learned profession," etc., my mind jumps to those schools... They also each have class sizes of like 600+ people.

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

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby General Tso » Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:25 am

A more realistic reform approach is detailed here:

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/resear ... aham-2.pdf

long story short: law schools are on the hook if their graduates cannot repay. I think this would be a good idea for all federal loans, especially in the case of for-profit colleges.

kublaikahn
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:47 am

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby kublaikahn » Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:52 am

General Tso wrote:A more realistic reform approach is detailed here:

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/resear ... aham-2.pdf

long story short: law schools are on the hook if their graduates cannot repay. I think this would be a good idea for all federal loans, especially in the case of for-profit colleges.


This is another marxist approach that will not work Shifting the burden will ALWAYS worsen a problem, not improve. In this case, the professors want to shift the burden from the irresponsible student to the institutions. Marxists will always clamour to the deepest pocket. Students will realize they have a get out of jail free card for a bad decision. What will really result is more professional students.

The problem is that students have already been able to shift the burden to the goverment in the form of subsidies. Most students have very little skin in the game. The only skin they have is the loans down the road. Law School is a lottery ticket that you don't have to pay for until after you have supposedly won. LS and loans provide a variable rate reinforcement schedule, the most addictive motivator around.

The false promises and lies pushed by rating systems and faked placement figures are a part of the problem (but that should be covered in tort law).

User avatar
mpj_3050
Posts: 372
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby mpj_3050 » Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:54 am

flcath wrote:I am concerned that my Infilaw stocks might go down.


I still can't believe that they can do this shit.

kublaikahn
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:47 am

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby kublaikahn » Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:10 pm

.
Last edited by kublaikahn on Tue May 17, 2011 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby General Tso » Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:31 pm

kublaikahn wrote:
General Tso wrote:A more realistic reform approach is detailed here:

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/resear ... aham-2.pdf

long story short: law schools are on the hook if their graduates cannot repay. I think this would be a good idea for all federal loans, especially in the case of for-profit colleges.


This is another marxist approach that will not work Shifting the burden will ALWAYS worsen a problem, not improve. In this case, the professors want to shift the burden from the irresponsible student to the institutions. Marxists will always clamour to the deepest pocket. Students will realize they have a get out of jail free card for a bad decision. What will really result is more professional students.

The problem is that students have already been able to shift the burden to the goverment in the form of subsidies. Most students have very little skin in the game. The only skin they have is the loans down the road. Law School is a lottery ticket that you don't have to pay for until after you have supposedly won. LS and loans provide a variable rate reinforcement schedule, the most addictive motivator around.

The false promises and lies pushed by rating systems and faked placement figures are a part of the problem (but that should be covered in tort law).


As it currently stands, law schools reap all the rewards while sharing in none of the risk. If they are going to lure in students with "false promises and lies," then they should bear some of the burden when students' expectations are not met.

Although many have tried, I have never heard of anyone successfully suing their law school for fraud or misrepresentation. If you know of any such cases, please share.

flcath
Posts: 1502
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby flcath » Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:37 pm

kublaikahn wrote:
General Tso wrote:A more realistic reform approach is detailed here:

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/resear ... aham-2.pdf

long story short: law schools are on the hook if their graduates cannot repay. I think this would be a good idea for all federal loans, especially in the case of for-profit colleges.


This is another marxist approach that will not work Shifting the burden will ALWAYS worsen a problem, not improve. In this case, the professors want to shift the burden from the irresponsible student to the institutions. Marxists will always clamour to the deepest pocket. Students will realize they have a get out of jail free card for a bad decision. What will really result is more professional students.

The problem is that students have already been able to shift the burden to the goverment in the form of subsidies. Most students have very little skin in the game. The only skin they have is the loans down the road. Law School is a lottery ticket that you don't have to pay for until after you have supposedly won. LS and loans provide a variable rate reinforcement schedule, the most addictive motivator around.

The false promises and lies pushed by rating systems and faked placement figures are a part of the problem (but that should be covered in tort law).

Thank you for using this opportunity to pull out and groom your pet ideology.

With the right-wingers talking like this, and the left-wingers bitching about how cutting fed loans will limit access to LSs to the rich white elite, no wonder nothing gets done, and the profession goes down the toilet.

I don't really give a shit if it gets done through cutting federally-backed loans, making LSs the guarantors, or the evil Marxist hand of government just unilaterally shutting down 75 law schools... the legal profession as it currently exists is not a real profession.

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby A'nold » Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:47 pm

flcath wrote:
kublaikahn wrote:
General Tso wrote:A more realistic reform approach is detailed here:

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/resear ... aham-2.pdf

long story short: law schools are on the hook if their graduates cannot repay. I think this would be a good idea for all federal loans, especially in the case of for-profit colleges.


This is another marxist approach that will not work Shifting the burden will ALWAYS worsen a problem, not improve. In this case, the professors want to shift the burden from the irresponsible student to the institutions. Marxists will always clamour to the deepest pocket. Students will realize they have a get out of jail free card for a bad decision. What will really result is more professional students.

The problem is that students have already been able to shift the burden to the goverment in the form of subsidies. Most students have very little skin in the game. The only skin they have is the loans down the road. Law School is a lottery ticket that you don't have to pay for until after you have supposedly won. LS and loans provide a variable rate reinforcement schedule, the most addictive motivator around.

The false promises and lies pushed by rating systems and faked placement figures are a part of the problem (but that should be covered in tort law).

Thank you for using this opportunity to pull out and groom your pet ideology.

With the right-wingers talking like this, and the left-wingers bitching about how cutting fed loans will limit access to LSs to the rich white elite, no wonder nothing gets done, and the profession goes down the toilet.

I don't really give a shit if it gets done through cutting federally-backed loans, making LSs the guarantors, or the evil Marxist hand of government just unilaterally shutting down 75 law schools... the legal profession as it currently exists is not a real profession.


I agree with most of this, especially your critique of narrow minded political dude's extreme comments above.

User avatar
JPrezy87
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby JPrezy87 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:25 am

A'nold wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
A'nold wrote:Cutting down each class across the country by like 15% would probably really help this crisis. It wouldn't by any means solve it, but it could help.


This except all T3 schools should cut down by 50% or more.

Well yeah, mostly all of us on here agree that most private law schools past t2 (there are many in the t2 that I would lump in here too) should completely shut down.

T3's like U. of Montana, North/South Dakota, etc. should remain open but schools like Willamette, Gonzaga, Akron, Tulsa, Cooley, etc. should be bye-bye.



welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)

FiveSermon
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:56 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby FiveSermon » Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:29 am

JPrezy87 wrote:
A'nold wrote:
FiveSermon wrote:
A'nold wrote:Cutting down each class across the country by like 15% would probably really help this crisis. It wouldn't by any means solve it, but it could help.


This except all T3 schools should cut down by 50% or more.

Well yeah, mostly all of us on here agree that most private law schools past t2 (there are many in the t2 that I would lump in here too) should completely shut down.

T3's like U. of Montana, North/South Dakota, etc. should remain open but schools like Willamette, Gonzaga, Akron, Tulsa, Cooley, etc. should be bye-bye.



welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


But niche insular markets don't pay enough to pay off the 150k+ in debt that most students who attend TTT incur.

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

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby General Tso » Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:55 am

JPrezy87 wrote: welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?

Army2Law
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby Army2Law » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:23 am

bigkahuna2020 wrote:
A'nold wrote:Let's figure this out b/c I'm bored. I also have to change my opinion that every state gets one b/c there are a few where it makes no sense.:

New Jersey- 39. Pick one of the Rutgers.


I know I forgot some but here you go, 70 or so law schools.


One law school for a state of 8.5 million that has a pretty vibrant legal market? Same as New Mexico, Wyoming and Delaware?

This. And also Texas only gets two schools but so does Utah? That makes less than 0 sense.

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby A'nold » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:48 am

Army2Law wrote:
bigkahuna2020 wrote:
A'nold wrote:Let's figure this out b/c I'm bored. I also have to change my opinion that every state gets one b/c there are a few where it makes no sense.:

New Jersey- 39. Pick one of the Rutgers.


I know I forgot some but here you go, 70 or so law schools.


One law school for a state of 8.5 million that has a pretty vibrant legal market? Same as New Mexico, Wyoming and Delaware?

This. And also Texas only gets two schools but so does Utah? That makes less than 0 sense.


Utah: One private, one public, both top 50 schools. No sense? Really? I would eliminate BYU before Utah, but that aint happening, considering the popularity of that school.

What, do you want me to put your precious SMU on the list?

Army2Law
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby Army2Law » Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:09 am

A'nold wrote:Utah: One private, one public, both top 50 schools. No sense? Really? I would eliminate BYU before Utah, but that aint happening, considering the popularity of that school.

What, do you want me to put your precious SMU on the list?


I could care less about SMU, but having 3 schools in Texas would make sense since it's the second most populated state in the US and Dallas and Houston by themselves each have more people than the entire state of Utah.

User avatar
skoobily doobily
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby skoobily doobily » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:36 am

You'd think that by being the 4th most populated state in the country, and having virtually all the graduates from the state schools stay within the state, Florida would get more than 2 schools. Miami and Stetson would probably stay. After all, there is some public need for local practitioners.

User avatar
JPrezy87
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby JPrezy87 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 10:40 am

General Tso wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote: welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?



um....you think there isn't?? 8)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273311
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:05 am

JPrezy87 wrote:
General Tso wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote: welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?



um....you think there isn't?? 8)


Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.

flcath
Posts: 1502
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:39 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby flcath » Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:16 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:
General Tso wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote: welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?



um....you think there isn't?? 8)


Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.

Yeah, well, you're going for free dude.

User avatar
JPrezy87
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby JPrezy87 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:
General Tso wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote: welll....cooley's actually a t4 but (and you're right we should shut t-4s down) ..and what's with all the looking down at t-3s on this board??? Most of the third tiers I've read about are pretty good at placing grads in niche, insular markets :)


do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?



um....you think there isn't?? 8)


Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.


welll good I'm happy for ya :). And i would tell General Tso of plenty of examples of t3 grads doing very well for themselves and making sick bank...but based on his posting history he seems to be a snobbish, pretentious little prick so I won't even bother ;)

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby A'nold » Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:
General Tso wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:

do you really think there is a meaningful distinction between T3 and T4?



um....you think there isn't?? 8)


Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.


welll good I'm happy for ya :). And i would tell General Tso of plenty of examples of t3 grads doing very well for themselves and making sick bank...but based on his posting history he seems to be a snobbish, pretentious little prick so I won't even bother ;)

Wow, you couldn't be more off. Actually, there is really no difference b/w tier 2, 3, or 4. It's all regional.

Sorry to deflate your ego (you seem to want to look down on someone, in your case t4's fit the bill I guess) but there are many t4's that place just fine. I know you won't believe it but it really does not matter if you go to a t2, 3, or 4.

User avatar
JPrezy87
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby JPrezy87 » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:15 pm

A'nold wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:


um....you think there isn't?? 8)


Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.


welll good I'm happy for ya :). And i would tell General Tso of plenty of examples of t3 grads doing very well for themselves and making sick bank...but based on his posting history he seems to be a snobbish, pretentious little prick so I won't even bother ;)

Wow, you couldn't be more off. Actually, there is really no difference b/w tier 2, 3, or 4. It's all regional.

Sorry to deflate your ego (you seem to want to look down on someone, in your case t4's fit the bill I guess) but there are many t4's that place just fine. I know you won't believe it but it really does not matter if you go to a t2, 3, or 4.


whoa whoa..since when was I being snobbish? I was attacking general tso for being a snob not being snoobish myself! and i agree that many law schools below tier 2 do place their grads very well...and what law school you go to doesn't determine how successful you're going to be!

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby A'nold » Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:18 pm

A'nold wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:
JPrezy87 wrote:




Explain how there is a difference b/w t3 & t4.

Also, t3s/t4s can place in more than just "niche, insular markets."

I go to a t4 for $0 and got a V100 in a major market. Happens more often than the t14 posters on tls know.


welll good I'm happy for ya :). And i would tell General Tso of plenty of examples of t3 grads doing very well for themselves and making sick bank...but based on his posting history he seems to be a snobbish, pretentious little prick so I won't even bother ;)

Wow, you couldn't be more off. Actually, there is really no difference b/w tier 2, 3, or 4. It's all regional.

Sorry to deflate your ego (you seem to want to look down on someone, in your case t4's fit the bill I guess) but there are many t4's that place just fine. I know you won't believe it but it really does not matter if you go to a t2, 3, or 4.


whoa whoa..since when was I being snobbish? I was attacking general tso for being a snob not being snoobish myself! and i agree that many law schools below tier 2 do place their grads very well...and what law school you go to doesn't determine how successful you're going to be!


Man, I was 50/50 whether you were trolling and I went the other way. See, all you people that get on me about calling out flames too much have made me soft! :evil:

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

Re: TTT to admit fewer students due to ITE

Postby General Tso » Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:46 pm

JPrezy87 wrote: whoa whoa..since when was I being snobbish? I was attacking general tso for being a snob not being snoobish myself! and i agree that many law schools below tier 2 do place their grads very well...and what law school you go to doesn't determine how successful you're going to be!


saying there's no difference b/w T3 and T4 is not being snobby. telling people never to go to law school unless they get into a T14 school is snobby. I would tell some people to attend a T3/T4 if the price is right and if their expectations are realistic. If you can go for nearly free and are okay making 40-50k then I see no reason why not.

FWIW I am attending an expensive T1 at sticker and I don't expect to make much more than that figure I just quoted.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.