NALP clashes with ABA

(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.
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 1:00 pm

NALP clashes with ABA

Postby shastaca » Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:36 am ... 2509192905

For my part I think there needs to be a third party involved in collecting the data, from former students, not the schools or employers.

LSAC already has contact with virtually all law students, why couldn't it create something to collect data from former law students too?

Problem of course is that employers have an incentive to report to NALP, schools have incentive, of a kind anyway, to report to the ABA, former law students have no incentive as far as I can tell to tell their schools or third parties about their employment.

User avatar
Posts: 2073
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:40 am

Re: NALP clashes with ABA

Postby PDaddy » Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:46 pm

The ABA's response tells me that something fishy is going on between it and the schools. The ABA has allowed schools to report shady data and mislead students into thinking job prospects were better than they actually have been. Do not think for one minute that the ABA powers have not known this.

I have said it before, and will continue saying it: "Something's rotten in Denmark!" I won't be surprised if there are fraud charges on the horizon, because that's what this really is.

The purposeful misreporting of employment stats, the ABA's cooperation by refusing to strengthen/streamline the reporting requirements, the bait-and-switch routine in awarding scholarships, the ABA continually feeding the USNWR's rankings monopoly by validating its clearly flawed system, the ABA's requirement that students take the faulty LSAT admissions exam that wrongly sorts students and denies access to the profession (without an available competitor test), and the ABA's allowing firms to completely recruit at their whims and ignore students at lower ranked schools...all of these things have created a corrupt system that costs the students and the public.

It is designed to keep schools profitable without accountability to the public, exclude ethnic minorities from the profession, allow the schools and the ABA to maintain secrecy and escape culpability, and maintain a self-perpetuating system of growth at students' expense.

The ABA is not trying to take the NALP out of the loop for nothing, it's hiding something. Some of these people belong in cuffs, I can feel it. The ABA, the schools and the USNWR are colluding, and the current calls for more transparency and a revamped system that clearly defines "employment" are threats to that system. Once you press where it hurts, you need to operate. The NALP should pursue this full bore, and the Department of Justice should get involved. .

Anonymous User
Posts: 271004
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: NALP clashes with ABA

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:32 pm

the ABA's allowing firms to completely recruit at their whims and ignore students at lower ranked schools...

Seriously, what would you have the ABA do? They encourage diversity- what possible sanction could the ABA impose on a firm?

Oh and by the way, the ABA does not require the LSAT-but the ABA does look at test scores to validate that the a school has sound admission policies. But test scores are neither the only nor a required meassure. They are just an easy proxy.

Standard 501. ADMISSIONS
(a) A law school shall maintain sound admission policies and practices, consistent with the
objectives of its educational program and the resources available for implementing those
(b) A law school shall not admit applicants who do not appear capable of satisfactorily
completing its educational program and being admitted to the bar.

Interpretation 501-1
Sound admissions policies and practices may include consideration of admission test scores,
undergraduate course of study and grade point average, extracurricular activities, work
experience, performance in other graduate or professional programs, relevant demonstrated
skills, and obstacles overcome.

Interpretation 501-2
A law school’s admission policies shall be consistent with Standards 211 and 212.

Interpretation 501-3
Among the factors to consider in assessing compliance with Standard 501(b) are the academic
and admission test credentials of the law school’s entering students, the academic attrition rate
of the law school’s students, the bar passage rate of its graduates, and the effectiveness of the law school’s academic support program.

Interpretation 501-4
A law school may not permit financial considerations detrimentally to affect its admission and
retention policies and their administration. A law school may face a conflict of interest whenever
the exercise of sound judgment in the application of admission policies or academic standards
and retention policies might reduce enrollment below the level necessary to support the program.

Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.