Indiana Tech Law School Forum

[Kimikho]

Well, Mr. Pogden, the expert on the legal market, why don't you tell us a bit more about yourself then, your profession and what makes you the authority on the subject.
I will happily tell you who I am and what I do. My name is Professor Frank Emmert, and I teach at the McKinney School. My CV and lists of publications and activities are easily found via Google. Ok, now you can stop reading, if you want, since I am obviously biased on the subject of law school admissions. I am one of the direct beneficiaries of the many students who are apparently conned into pursuing a career in law. But that also makes me somewhat of an expert on the subject, so you may still want to read on.
True: The market for lawyers was distorted for years. Too many law schools were cranking out too many lawyers with too little qualifications. Nobody had to try particularly hard because everybody was gobbled up by the market who could graduate from an ABA accredited school and pass the bar exam. The cost was passed on to the clients who were billed too many hours at too high rates. This was the situation until the market crashed in 2007 and we are still in the process of adjusting to the new normal. We were basically asking for a crash and for new entrepreneurs to challenge us with more innovative business models including electronic procedures and lower cost lawyers in countries such as India.
However, the law schools across the country are now turning out around 25% smaller graduating classes. And of those smaller classes, most of the students are significantly better qualified. Everybody has understood that you cannot just study contracts and torts and pass the bar exam to get a six figure job (any more). The overhang from the golden days is also largely taken care off by now. Put that together with the fact that many who postponed retirement after their pension funds imploded in the downturn of 2007/08 are now retiring, it means that the job perspectives for anyone who will start studying law in 2015 and will graduate in 2018, will actually be rather good.
When I graduated from law school myself, we had a saying pursuant to which the top 30% had choices, the middle 30% had a job, and the bottom 30% had a problem. This is where we are again right now. Is that really such a bad thing? For one thing, we are all working harder and better today than ever before, thanks to the competitive pressure that we simply did not have before 2007. Our graduates are more internationally qualified than ever before, they have taken more advanced and specialized subjects in areas such as intellectual property protection, health law and bioethics, environment and natural resources law, internet law, commercial and trade law, etc. than ever before. And they are more and better prepared for practice right out of law school. Last but not least, by 2018, the numbers will be better, more like 40/40/20.
So what does this all mean for somebody who is considering law as a possible career perspective? First it means that if you are planning to be in the bottom 20% of your class, you may want to hold off and study something else. But wait a moment, in which field can you actually make top dollar and have a high level of job satisfaction if you are at the bottom of the market? Maybe Mr. Pogden has a great idea on this one?
For everyone else, I recommend that you can pursue law if you can meet the following criteria:
1) You are passionate about fairness and justice and about helping individual or corporate clients with tailor-made solutions for their day to day problems, for their corporate strategies, business deals, interaction with the government authorities here or abroad, family and personal matters large or small, or a host of other issues where lawyers are the only ones that can provide competent support. Or you want to go into the public administration or the foreign service or into corporate management or one of the hundreds of other career alternatives where lawyers are often preferred to anyone with a less general or less sophisticated education.
2) You are willing to work hard and to set yourself apart by making use of the almost infinite number of opportunities that wait for you during your years at law school. We have added many new and timely features to our programs, a host of externship opportunities, specialized certificate programs, clinical and experiential placements, international exchanges, etc etc. On top of that, we are coaching our students more and better on how to identify the right job for them among the many things we do in the legal profession and how to accumulate the building blocks towards a persuasive and successful application for exactly that position. In 25 years in the profession, I have yet to meet a student who was doing all these things right and yet could not find a good job after graduation.
3) You want the most versatile and well-rounded education that is available anywhere in the world, a degree that can open many doors in many places, not just in Indiana, where the market is still not very good but getting better, but around the nation and around the world. Why are more and more countries reforming their legal education systems to become more like the US? Why are more and more universities around the world trying to partner with American law schools, sending their students and young faculty to the US for Master and doctoral studies and inviting American professors to help improve their educational models and programs? Because they don't know Mr. Pogden? Or because they know that we have in this country the best model for legal education anywhere and that we will never stop refining and improving to ensure that we as educators deliver what you as students pay for: The awesome opportunity to make a difference, to make the world a little better every day.
In summarizing, I have no doubt that if we take together the mid- to long-term earning potential with the lifelong job satisfaction, going to law school is still a great return on investment. Provided, however, that you are willing to apply yourself and distinguish yourself and aim for the top 80% of your class...

[prezidentv8]

a lengthy screed

I'm not even going to get into how stupid, inaccurate, and lazy that whole spiel was, but I will point out one thing:




THIS GUY

SEEMS LEGIT

[84651846190]

What the hell is going on in this thread? Why is it 53 pages long?

[BigZuck]

What the hell is going on in this thread? Why is it 53 pages long?

Someone decided to build a TTTT in Fort Wayne, Indiana and TLS was outraged. Then, the school was even less successful than projected and TLS piled on.

Along the way the Dean defended it to the elitists, then jumped from the sinking ship and TLS laughed out loud.

also, a man named pond cummings was born.

[JCougar]

What the hell is going on in this thread? Why is it 53 pages long?

It's rare that a dean shows up to personally defend such a large scam school.

In this sense, Indiana Tech is the new Cooley.

[Username123]

What the hell is going on in this thread? Why is it 53 pages long?

It's rare that a dean shows up to personally defend such a large scam school.

In this sense, Indiana Tech is the new Cooley.

Did Cooley start in a similar fashion to how Indiana Tech (I always wanna call it ITT Tech Law lolz) has started?

[JCougar]

Well, Mr. Pogden, the expert on the legal market, why don't you tell us a bit more about yourself then, your profession and what makes you the authority on the subject.
I will happily tell you who I am and what I do. My name is Professor Frank Emmert, and I teach at the McKinney School. My CV and lists of publications and activities are easily found via Google. Ok, now you can stop reading, if you want, since I am obviously biased on the subject of law school admissions. I am one of the direct beneficiaries of the many students who are apparently conned into pursuing a career in law. But that also makes me somewhat of an expert on the subject, so you may still want to read on.
True: The market for lawyers was distorted for years. Too many law schools were cranking out too many lawyers with too little qualifications. Nobody had to try particularly hard because everybody was gobbled up by the market who could graduate from an ABA accredited school and pass the bar exam. The cost was passed on to the clients who were billed too many hours at too high rates. This was the situation until the market crashed in 2007 and we are still in the process of adjusting to the new normal. We were basically asking for a crash and for new entrepreneurs to challenge us with more innovative business models including electronic procedures and lower cost lawyers in countries such as India.
However, the law schools across the country are now turning out around 25% smaller graduating classes. And of those smaller classes, most of the students are significantly better qualified. Everybody has understood that you cannot just study contracts and torts and pass the bar exam to get a six figure job (any more). The overhang from the golden days is also largely taken care off by now. Put that together with the fact that many who postponed retirement after their pension funds imploded in the downturn of 2007/08 are now retiring, it means that the job perspectives for anyone who will start studying law in 2015 and will graduate in 2018, will actually be rather good.
When I graduated from law school myself, we had a saying pursuant to which the top 30% had choices, the middle 30% had a job, and the bottom 30% had a problem. This is where we are again right now. Is that really such a bad thing? For one thing, we are all working harder and better today than ever before, thanks to the competitive pressure that we simply did not have before 2007. Our graduates are more internationally qualified than ever before, they have taken more advanced and specialized subjects in areas such as intellectual property protection, health law and bioethics, environment and natural resources law, internet law, commercial and trade law, etc. than ever before. And they are more and better prepared for practice right out of law school. Last but not least, by 2018, the numbers will be better, more like 40/40/20.
So what does this all mean for somebody who is considering law as a possible career perspective? First it means that if you are planning to be in the bottom 20% of your class, you may want to hold off and study something else. But wait a moment, in which field can you actually make top dollar and have a high level of job satisfaction if you are at the bottom of the market? Maybe Mr. Pogden has a great idea on this one?
For everyone else, I recommend that you can pursue law if you can meet the following criteria:
1) You are passionate about fairness and justice and about helping individual or corporate clients with tailor-made solutions for their day to day problems, for their corporate strategies, business deals, interaction with the government authorities here or abroad, family and personal matters large or small, or a host of other issues where lawyers are the only ones that can provide competent support. Or you want to go into the public administration or the foreign service or into corporate management or one of the hundreds of other career alternatives where lawyers are often preferred to anyone with a less general or less sophisticated education.
2) You are willing to work hard and to set yourself apart by making use of the almost infinite number of opportunities that wait for you during your years at law school. We have added many new and timely features to our programs, a host of externship opportunities, specialized certificate programs, clinical and experiential placements, international exchanges, etc etc. On top of that, we are coaching our students more and better on how to identify the right job for them among the many things we do in the legal profession and how to accumulate the building blocks towards a persuasive and successful application for exactly that position. In 25 years in the profession, I have yet to meet a student who was doing all these things right and yet could not find a good job after graduation.
3) You want the most versatile and well-rounded education that is available anywhere in the world, a degree that can open many doors in many places, not just in Indiana, where the market is still not very good but getting better, but around the nation and around the world. Why are more and more countries reforming their legal education systems to become more like the US? Why are more and more universities around the world trying to partner with American law schools, sending their students and young faculty to the US for Master and doctoral studies and inviting American professors to help improve their educational models and programs? Because they don't know Mr. Pogden? Or because they know that we have in this country the best model for legal education anywhere and that we will never stop refining and improving to ensure that we as educators deliver what you as students pay for: The awesome opportunity to make a difference, to make the world a little better every day.
In summarizing, I have no doubt that if we take together the mid- to long-term earning potential with the lifelong job satisfaction, going to law school is still a great return on investment. Provided, however, that you are willing to apply yourself and distinguish yourself and aim for the top 80% of your class...

LOL. The job market for new lawyers has always been bad given the debt. Even 10 years ago--the "glory days" as Emmert wants to remember them--there was still ~25% of JDs who couldn't find real jobs. If you're gonna make a law degree cost as much as it does, even that is unacceptable. Either lower the cost, or go with the medical school model and screen people out before they get in.

[JCougar]

Did Cooley start in a similar fashion to how Indiana Tech (I always wanna call it ITT Tech Law lolz) has started?

I dunno, but this has gotten me to thinking...Fort Wayne and Lansing aren't really all that far apart. Maybe Indy Tech is like some sort of secret prank by Cooley to divert negative attention...

[Tiago Splitter]

LOL. The job market for new lawyers has always been bad given the debt. Even 10 years ago--the "glory days" as Emmert wants to remember them--there was still ~25% of JDs who couldn't find real jobs.

I might even eliminate the "given the debt" qualifier. One of the myths in recent years has been that the recession caused a temporary blip and that things were pretty good for a long time before 2008. The reality is that huge portions of graduates did not have legal jobs nine months out, if ever, for as far back as we have data.

[JCougar]

LOL. The job market for new lawyers has always been bad given the debt. Even 10 years ago--the "glory days" as Emmert wants to remember them--there was still ~25% of JDs who couldn't find real jobs.

I might even eliminate the "given the debt" qualifier. One of the myths in recent years has been that the recession caused a temporary blip and that things were pretty good for a long time before 2008. The reality is that huge portions of graduates did not have legal jobs nine months out, if ever, for as far back as we have data.

The only reason I added "given the debt" is that the job market for stuff like PhDs and a lot of undergrad majors is a lot worse than law school. However, PhD's pay very little, if anything for their degree. A lot of times, even their COL is covered. And I'd be floored if any more than like 15% or so of psychology or literature Bachelor's people have jobs in their field.

But undergrad doesn't put you $250K in debt, and neither do any PhD programs.

[Username123]

How is it that law school tuition has been allowed to increase 500% or so in the last decade alone (just came up with a random number that I thought was pretty accurate)? This seems much higher of a percentage increase than inflation?

How does that all work? It seems like a scam to me perpetuated by the federal government and the free distribution of student loans.

Schools like Cooley shouldn't be allowed to charge over 5,000 a school year given the likelihood of landing any employment that requires its degree following graduation.

[thebobs1987]

Well, Mr. Pogden, the expert on the legal market, why don't you tell us a bit more about yourself then, your profession and what makes you the authority on the subject.
I will happily tell you who I am and what I do. My name is Professor Frank Emmert, and I teach at the McKinney School. My CV and lists of publications and activities are easily found via Google. Ok, now you can stop reading, if you want, since I am obviously biased on the subject of law school admissions. I am one of the direct beneficiaries of the many students who are apparently conned into pursuing a career in law. But that also makes me somewhat of an expert on the subject, so you may still want to read on.
True: The market for lawyers was distorted for years. Too many law schools were cranking out too many lawyers with too little qualifications. Nobody had to try particularly hard because everybody was gobbled up by the market who could graduate from an ABA accredited school and pass the bar exam. The cost was passed on to the clients who were billed too many hours at too high rates. This was the situation until the market crashed in 2007 and we are still in the process of adjusting to the new normal. We were basically asking for a crash and for new entrepreneurs to challenge us with more innovative business models including electronic procedures and lower cost lawyers in countries such as India.
However, the law schools across the country are now turning out around 25% smaller graduating classes. And of those smaller classes, most of the students are significantly better qualified. Everybody has understood that you cannot just study contracts and torts and pass the bar exam to get a six figure job (any more). The overhang from the golden days is also largely taken care off by now. Put that together with the fact that many who postponed retirement after their pension funds imploded in the downturn of 2007/08 are now retiring, it means that the job perspectives for anyone who will start studying law in 2015 and will graduate in 2018, will actually be rather good.
When I graduated from law school myself, we had a saying pursuant to which the top 30% had choices, the middle 30% had a job, and the bottom 30% had a problem. This is where we are again right now. Is that really such a bad thing? For one thing, we are all working harder and better today than ever before, thanks to the competitive pressure that we simply did not have before 2007. Our graduates are more internationally qualified than ever before, they have taken more advanced and specialized subjects in areas such as intellectual property protection, health law and bioethics, environment and natural resources law, internet law, commercial and trade law, etc. than ever before. And they are more and better prepared for practice right out of law school. Last but not least, by 2018, the numbers will be better, more like 40/40/20.
So what does this all mean for somebody who is considering law as a possible career perspective? First it means that if you are planning to be in the bottom 20% of your class, you may want to hold off and study something else. But wait a moment, in which field can you actually make top dollar and have a high level of job satisfaction if you are at the bottom of the market? Maybe Mr. Pogden has a great idea on this one?
For everyone else, I recommend that you can pursue law if you can meet the following criteria:
1) You are passionate about fairness and justice and about helping individual or corporate clients with tailor-made solutions for their day to day problems, for their corporate strategies, business deals, interaction with the government authorities here or abroad, family and personal matters large or small, or a host of other issues where lawyers are the only ones that can provide competent support. Or you want to go into the public administration or the foreign service or into corporate management or one of the hundreds of other career alternatives where lawyers are often preferred to anyone with a less general or less sophisticated education.
2) You are willing to work hard and to set yourself apart by making use of the almost infinite number of opportunities that wait for you during your years at law school. We have added many new and timely features to our programs, a host of externship opportunities, specialized certificate programs, clinical and experiential placements, international exchanges, etc etc. On top of that, we are coaching our students more and better on how to identify the right job for them among the many things we do in the legal profession and how to accumulate the building blocks towards a persuasive and successful application for exactly that position. In 25 years in the profession, I have yet to meet a student who was doing all these things right and yet could not find a good job after graduation.
3) You want the most versatile and well-rounded education that is available anywhere in the world, a degree that can open many doors in many places, not just in Indiana, where the market is still not very good but getting better, but around the nation and around the world. Why are more and more countries reforming their legal education systems to become more like the US? Why are more and more universities around the world trying to partner with American law schools, sending their students and young faculty to the US for Master and doctoral studies and inviting American professors to help improve their educational models and programs? Because they don't know Mr. Pogden? Or because they know that we have in this country the best model for legal education anywhere and that we will never stop refining and improving to ensure that we as educators deliver what you as students pay for: The awesome opportunity to make a difference, to make the world a little better every day.
In summarizing, I have no doubt that if we take together the mid- to long-term earning potential with the lifelong job satisfaction, going to law school is still a great return on investment. Provided, however, that you are willing to apply yourself and distinguish yourself and aim for the top 80% of your class...

LOL. The job market for new lawyers has always been bad given the debt. Even 10 years ago--the "glory days" as Emmert wants to remember them--there was still ~25% of JDs who couldn't find real jobs. If you're gonna make a law degree cost as much as it does, even that is unacceptable. Either lower the cost, or go with the medical school model and screen people out before they get in.

The medical school model would be ideal since schools are never going to reduce tuition at an impactful amount. Unfortunately the ABA doesn't care about future lawyers and what is good for them unlike the AMA cares about future doctors. Hence the link plus all the terrible law school factories that are ABA approved http://abovethelaw.com/2015/02/does-the ... s-to-jobs/

[buddyt]

When I graduated from law school myself, we had a saying pursuant to which the top 30% had choices, the middle 30% had a job, and the bottom 30% had a problem.

30 + 30 + 30 = ... wait a minute ...

Also, "pursuant to which"? Gas yourself.

[Hand]

When I graduated from law school myself, we had a saying pursuant to which the top 30% had choices, the middle 30% had a job, and the bottom 30% had a problem.

30 + 30 + 30 = ... wait a minute ...

Also, "pursuant to which"? Gas yourself.

bottom ten percent killed themselves, duhh

[84651846190]

What the hell is going on in this thread? Why is it 53 pages long?

Someone decided to build a TTTT in Fort Wayne, Indiana and TLS was outraged. Then, the school was even less successful than projected and TLS piled on.

Along the way the Dean defended it to the elitists, then jumped from the sinking ship and TLS laughed out loud.

also, a man named pond cummings was born.

tyft

[JCougar]

The medical school model would be ideal since schools are never going to reduce tuition at an impactful amount. Unfortunately the ABA doesn't care about future lawyers and what is good for them unlike the AMA cares about future doctors. Hence the link plus all the terrible law school factories that are ABA approved http://abovethelaw.com/2015/02/does-the ... s-to-jobs/

Correct. The ABA cares about present law partners, who need a high level of desperation (high debt, lucky to have any job at all) to get people intelligent enough to bill at high rates to do the kind of boring, rote shitwork that most entry-level associates are tasked with.

[timbs4339]

Correct. The ABA cares about present law partners, who need a high level of desperation (high debt, lucky to have any job at all) to get people intelligent enough to bill at high rates to do the kind of boring, rote shitwork that most entry-level associates are tasked with.

It's less complicated than that.

Biglaw partners really don't care whether some T4 or T1 school is charging 10K per year or 50K per year. They'd have more than enough qualfied people willing to work biglaw jobs even if tuition was half what it is now for a number of reasons. They may have a bit of common cause with law school deans/professors since they are all in the upper crust of the profession but otherwise they just don't care. Most of them would probably be sympathetic to a student with 200K in debt and no job.

The ABA higher-ups care about not being sued by the DOJ. They are very happy to let the law schools and other interested parties do the grunt work of accrediting law schools. The other interested parties, aside from the law professors/deans, will usually be other people who think they can make a buck off of kids (people who run student loan companies) or have some ideological edge to grind (i.e. people who just want to dismantle higher ed).

[84651846190]

The medical school model would be ideal since schools are never going to reduce tuition at an impactful amount. Unfortunately the ABA doesn't care about future lawyers and what is good for them unlike the AMA cares about future doctors. Hence the link plus all the terrible law school factories that are ABA approved http://abovethelaw.com/2015/02/does-the ... s-to-jobs/

Correct. The ABA cares about present law partners, who need a high level of desperation (high debt, lucky to have any job at all) to get people intelligent enough to bill at high rates to do the kind of boring, rote shitwork that most entry-level associates are tasked with.

I was under the impression that the ABA was beholden to law professors, not practicing lawyers. Some of my professors were former high-level ABA officials, so I assumed there was at least some connection between legal academia and the ABA. This explains why they promote production of as many law students as possible.

[Timetolaw]

Didn't see this in the thread yet...

The school has a new dean:

http://law.indianatech.edu/general-news ... aw-school/

http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana ... icle/35785

[03152016]

lol cooley prof/associate dean becomes dean of itls
you can't make this stuff up

[BigZuck]

lol cooley prof/associate dean becomes dean of itls
you can't make this stuff up

He also worked at some of the most prestigious law firms in the US, two of which folded after he left.

Coincidence?

[03152016]

http://outsidethelawschoolscam.blogspot ... 6.html?m=1

[Pragmatic Gun]

I'm not sure how to respond. There's no snark comment to be made here; Indiana Tech became a satire unwittingly. It would be cliché to claim indignation. I think law school has jumped the shark

[BigZuck]

I like how the first thing you do is get prepared for your first year of law school

After that, you learn what a lawyer is

Seriously?

[MKC]

From the web site:

Small Class Sizes
Don’t expect to be sitting in large lecture halls here. Our classes are small enough that students have the opportunity to join in discussions, ask questions, and get to know professors and classmates.

Yeah, no shit class sizes are small when only 35 people get suckered into attending.