I'm not so sure about that. The TTTs are more likely to not have endowments to help them blunt the pain- meaning that they are basically operating in a model where cash coming in must go out. Therefore they must maintain class size or their school will fold. They also cannot give out huge scholarships to try and entice more students because that money is already allocated to other things.
Now if the T1s and T2s are taking students that normally would have gone to TTTs, the TTTs will simply just pluck people out of the 130 and low 140 range to fill their classes. Who cares about LSAT/GPA right? But then they are going to have a serious problem assembling a class where 75% of the students can pass the bar. Thomas Jefferson did- only 33% of their most recent class passed. If this continues, they might lose accreditation.
Luckily for TJSL, they can operate as an unaccredited school in CA where they are located. But some other TTTs can't. If they lose accreditation their graduates cannot sit for the bar. And then they either have to make SERIOUS cuts in class size, or they fold for lack of applicants.
I go to a private TTT. Though the school remained TTT in 2011 and 2012, it dropped about 10 spots. An e-mail was sent out in which the dean said they were going to decrease the incoming class in order to increase the UGPA/LSAT scores, which would mean maybe a higher USNews ranking. I don't really see what the big deal about the drop is. 110 to 120 or whatever is still TTT to TTT. This method will be... interesting... for tuition rates that go up every year. In the past years, the school said that tuition increases were due to costs associated with professors' salaries.
As for bar passage rates in my state, ironically enough, FIU (not sure if T3 or T4) had the highest passage rate.
That's interesting but not surprising. Generally, T3 and T4 schools are bar prep schools- teaching you to pass the bar for three years. Why this costs 40 or 50K per year when Barbri can do it in three months for $3.5K is another question. They also fail out a significant number of students which probably helps the rate. I did notice that schools like Ave Maria, FAMU, Barry were dead last though.
Hastings announced this a while ago actually, it isn't really news or anything. I have no problem with reducing the class size by 20%, I think it is the responsible thing to do. Having a class size of 400+ makes it extremely difficult to have good employment prospects in such a desired market, or anywhere really. I also don't mind them cutting some staff if it means they aren't raising tuition even more. I don't really understand why this is being portrayed in such a negative light. It isn't like they are increasing the class size.
It's interesting because when push comes to shove, tenured faculty are not different from any other power group in American society, meaning they will sacrifice anything before their standard of living is affected. This is despite all their BS rhetoric and their supposed love of their institutions and blah blah. They will push as much of the costs as they can on students. Then, if that reaches a tipping point as it has done over the last few years and they are unable to push any more onto students, they will push it on to lower paid administrative employees. They will do so much to prevent themselves from hurting that it would take the complete dissolution of the law school for them to start feeling it, and then I bet those consequences would be concentrated among younger faculty. This is like Dewey which is imploding as we speak, but where the same partners who plunged the firm into despair will emerge relatively unscathed, with increasing levels of pain being felt by non-equity partners, then seniors, midlevels, juniors, 3Ls, SAs, and staff. The same thing happened with Howrey. If anyone doubts that law school is just a business and professors and deans are the owners, you have only to look at what will happen over the next few months.
I am sad for the people who lost their jobs. I think there is still a long way to go and many more need to lose their jobs before this system gets back into equilibrium because the amount of administrative bloat at some law schools is staggering. However, I would like to see one of these faculties take a haircut before they have to fire some 9-5 Joe.