University of North Texas- Dallas College of Law Forum

[jingosaur]

Yet another new law school opening up this fall. They got about 600 applications and will have a class of about 140 students which is pretty surprising.Tuition for the inaugural class is around $13k with fees, which is much cheaper than what our friends at Indy Tech charge, but Indy Tech also gives half scholarships for a 148 LSAT. The Texas legal market is one of the less glutted large legal markets, there are still plenty of TTTs in Texas that don't place their students in real jobs.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/educatio ... terest.ece

Thoughts on UNTDCoL?

[txdude45]

I'm glad that people who were gonna stumble butt backwards into law school without doing much research anyway now have a (more) affordable option, but this is still a net negative.

[legalese_retard]

As long as the school sticks to its mission and keeps tuition low, I'm okay with the additional law school. I heard Judge Furgeson speak about the law school at a local event. He said that UNT's purpose is to educate people that want to serve the public AND be in the financial position to actually accomplish that goal. While there is an oversupply of attorneys in this country, there is an undersupply of attorneys willing and able to represent the public interest. Graduates from UNT won't be getting big law jobs, but its students will be aware of that fact before enrolling.

The downtown location of the school helps in its mission. Judge Furgeson said that most of its facility will consist of adjunct professors whose offices will be nearby. Plus, clinical training will be a huge component of the curriculum, which will also benefit from being in downtown and near the area courts.

While I think several private TTT law schools should be shut down, I think low-cost legal education should be encouraged.

[TheJanitor6203]

I'm blown away by their class size! I was expecting half of that. I think I read the first class was going to be all part time as well. It seems like their target is the lower income population of Dallas that want law school but can't afford SMU. I don't think it's inherently bad. At least its not for-profit.

[Ricky-Bobby]

I get it. I understand the push to serve underrepresented communities. But why not just make one of the other four Texas public law schools cheaper? Texas Southern has an LST score of 34%. Cut the hell out of that tuition and make that your new budget option.

[Ricky-Bobby]

At least its not for-profit.

A meaningless distinction.


The first for-profit school on this list is Florida Coastal. Are all of the higher unemployment options somehow more morally-justified because they don't have shareholders?

[deadpanic]

While there is an oversupply of attorneys in this country, there is an undersupply of attorneys willing and able to represent the public interest.

I agree that there could be more public interest attorneys, but I don't think it is due to an undersupply of those willing to do so. There just isn't the funding to support more public interest groups so it's silly to try to churn out more for jobs that aren't available. We don't need any more grads to hang their own shingle, either. I graduated with plenty of unemployed grads that would have loved to work in PI.

[NYSprague]

As long as the school sticks to its mission and keeps tuition low, I'm okay with the additional law school. I heard Judge Furgeson speak about the law school at a local event. He said that UNT's purpose is to educate people that want to serve the public AND be in the financial position to actually accomplish that goal. While there is an oversupply of attorneys in this country, there is an undersupply of attorneys willing and able to represent the public interest. Graduates from UNT won't be getting big law jobs, but its students will be aware of that fact before enrolling.

The downtown location of the school helps in its mission. Judge Furgeson said that most of its facility will consist of adjunct professors whose offices will be nearby. Plus, clinical training will be a huge component of the curriculum, which will also benefit from being in downtown and near the area courts.

While I think several private TTT law schools should be shut down, I think low-cost legal education should be encouraged.

There are plenty of lawyers willing and able to represent the public interest. There are very few actual JOBS in the public interest.Cranking out more lawyers does nothing to change the lack of JOBS. Even with low tuition, how many low income people can work for free? They won't be making a salary. It's just a fallacy to claim lawyers with high debt won't do public interest, under PSLF, that option is feasible if you can find a JOB. That money should go into funding and supporting jobs not scamming more people into the profession who are unlikely to ever practice.

[Ricky-Bobby]

Surprise, surprise, they're doing the "innovative real-world" routine.

http://lawschool.untsystem.edu/why-unt-dallas-col

How many of these schools need a clinical-heavy focus before the approach is no longer "innovative"?

We offer an innovative approach to legal education.

We are a new law school, with a fresh emphasis on learning by doing. We utilize the best instructional practices, offer engaged, experiential and collaborative learning, and provide ongoing assessment for our students. Since sound legal judgment is cultivated by experience, we give you ample opportunities to do real law. Most of our upper level courses include a “lab” component that applies the subject matter while developing practical competencies. And our students actively participate in practice settings while receiving mentoring and guidance.

[Stevoman]

I do not see what this will accomplish besides pad the unemployed lawyer numbers in DFW.

SMU and UT already have the DFW market cornered. SMU is particularly incestuous, tons of small/mid sized firms here hire almost exclusively from SMU. If UNT is hoping to corner the lower end market (and it sounds like it with their tuition talk), then they're going up against Wesleyan/A&M and Texas Tech.

I guess my point is that I don't see what portion of the market they possibly are hoping to capture. It's looking to be just another taxpayer-funded T4 unemployment mill.

[TheJanitor6203]

I get it. I understand the push to serve underrepresented communities. But why not just make one of the other four Texas public law schools cheaper? Texas Southern has an LST score of 34%. Cut the hell out of that tuition and make that your new budget option.

The reason is that Texas Southern is in Houston and UNT is in Dallas. Part of the reason LS is out of reach for their (presumed) target student is because relocation is also probably out of the question. To your other post, yes, I do think that it being a not-for-profit school makes it better morally. To me, it signals that the State is attempting this for good reasons where for-profit schools are doing it solely to get rich. I'm sure their employment numbers are going to suck and I don't advocate going here but I understand its purpose. DFW is a huge metropolitan area; it should have a public law school.

[Louis1127]

Perhaps their low tuition will force another, much more expensive Texas law to close, and then this law school actually will be helping the situation, albeit just barely? Just a thought. I know nothing about Texas. Do y'all think that could happen?

[TheJanitor6203]

Perhaps their low tuition will force another, much more expensive Texas law to close, and then this law school actually will be helping the situation, albeit just barely? Just a thought. I know nothing about Texas. Do y'all think that could happen?

No. The only other LS in Dallas is SMU and they're not going anywhere. Texas A&M just bought Texas Wesleyan in Ft. Worth so it is becoming a public LS beginning this fall as well. If it had remained private, your scenario could have happened although I still doubt that. I think the schools are far enough apart that they can both survive.

[baal hadad]

So it's a craphole, but a cheap craphole

[baal hadad]

As long as the school sticks to its mission and keeps tuition low, I'm okay with the additional law school. I heard Judge Furgeson speak about the law school at a local event. He said that UNT's purpose is to educate people that want to serve the public AND be in the financial position to actually accomplish that goal. While there is an oversupply of attorneys in this country, there is an undersupply of attorneys willing and able to represent the public interest. Graduates from UNT won't be getting big law jobs, but its students will be aware of that fact before enrolling.

The downtown location of the school helps in its mission. Judge Furgeson said that most of its facility will consist of adjunct professors whose offices will be nearby. Plus, clinical training will be a huge component of the curriculum, which will also benefit from being in downtown and near the area courts.

While I think several private TTT law schools should be shut down, I think low-cost legal education should be encouraged.

You're 100% wrong

There is not an under supply of people who want to work in PI

We have PSLF so basically everyone can afford to

The problem is PI orgs have no money to pay people

[Ricky-Bobby]

The reason is that Texas Southern is in Houston and UNT is in Dallas. Part of the reason LS is out of reach for their (presumed) target student is because relocation is also probably out of the question. To your other post, yes, I do think that it being a not-for-profit school makes it better morally. To me, it signals that the State is attempting this for good reasons where for-profit schools are doing it solely to get rich. I'm sure their employment numbers are going to suck and I don't advocate going here but I understand its purpose. DFW is a huge metropolitan area; it should have a public law school.

I'm sure some of the 70% of unemployed Texas Southern grads can make the 250 mile trek up to Dallas to fill the void.

You truly believe that Southern University is better than Florida Coastal? If Southern can look at its repeated dogshit employment stats and continue to charge $120k in the name of "good reasons," they are as morally bankrupt as anyone else.

What if HLS was suddenly bought by Infilaw? Would it suddenly become evil because it's for-profit?

[nightcheese]

If your acronym has at least seven letters, your name is too damn long.

$13k tuition is pretty awesome tho. I mean, this country (and much less Texas) needs another law school like we all need a hole in the head, but at least they're not charging T14 prices.

[TheJanitor6203]

The reason is that Texas Southern is in Houston and UNT is in Dallas. Part of the reason LS is out of reach for their (presumed) target student is because relocation is also probably out of the question. To your other post, yes, I do think that it being a not-for-profit school makes it better morally. To me, it signals that the State is attempting this for good reasons where for-profit schools are doing it solely to get rich. I'm sure their employment numbers are going to suck and I don't advocate going here but I understand its purpose. DFW is a huge metropolitan area; it should have a public law school.

I'm sure some of the 70% of unemployed Texas Southern grads can make the 250 mile trek up to Dallas to fill the void.

You truly believe that Southern University is better than Florida Coastal? If Southern can look at its repeated dogshit employment stats and continue to charge $120k in the name of "good reasons," they are as morally bankrupt as anyone else.

What if HLS was suddenly bought by Infilaw? Would it suddenly become evil because it's for-profit?

I think you need to re-read my posts. I'm not saying one TTTT school is better than another- in fact I said they all suck and I wouldn't recommend any of them to anyone. I'm simply saying I understand why it is being established which is to serve the lower income population of Dallas that wants to attend law school and can't afford SMU or relocating to another city with a low cost LS. As for the morality issue, I'm saying that a State legislature establishing a low cost LS in a major city that did not already have a low cost option in order to make LS more affordable and accessible for people is a respectable reason to open a law school. Opening a law school, charging absurd amounts of money knowing that your students have little chance of securing employment as a lawyer for sole purpose of making money is not respectable.

[Ricky-Bobby]

I know you're not advocating attendance, so you can stop addressing that.

To your other post, yes, I do think that it being a not-for-profit school makes it better morally. To me, it signals that the State is attempting this for good reasons where for-profit schools are doing it solely to get rich.

As for the morality issue, I'm saying that a State legislature establishing a low cost LS in a major city that did not already have a low cost option in order to make LS more affordable and accessible for people is a respectable reason to open a law school. Opening a law school, charging absurd amounts of money knowing that your students have little chance of securing employment as a lawyer for sole purpose of making money is not respectable.

Your earlier post says nothing of relative costs. Don't move the goalposts by adding the caveat "low cost option." At that point the disagreement shifts to what constitutes "low cost."

I also should have never used the word "moral," because it's not really what I meant. Thank you for not going down some weird path about Kant or something.

My point is that for-profit status alone is an irrelevant distinction. Whether the State of Massachusetts is charging $162k at "Dartmouth" for a resident to have a 23% shot at a lawyer job or Infilaw is charging $246k at FC for a 29% shot doesn't make much difference. They're both scam operations, and people are getting rich off of both.

[03152016]

factoring in 5% cost inflation on tuition, here are in-state numbers

1L $14,040
col: $20,238
total: $34,278

2L $14,742
col: $20,238
total: $34,980

3L $15,479
col: $20,238
total: $35,717

with loan fees of 220 per year and interest at 6.21%
assuming six month deferment
$4,812 in interest on 1L loans, $3,332 in interest on 2L loans, and $1,939 in interest on 3L loans
for a total of $10,743 in stafford loan fees and interest

unmet need:
$13,778 ($591 plus loan origination, $3,801 interest)
$14,480 ($621 plus loan origination, $2,752 interest)
$15,217 ($653 plus loan origination, $1,675 interest)

total principle: $104,975
total interest and fees: $20,836
grand total: $125,811

yeah great deal

[yomisterd]

Maybe the greatest benefit could be lower tuition at other TTTs when they see the example set (low tuition -> higher enrollment)?

[rdawkins28]

Maybe the greatest benefit could be lower tuition at other TTTs when they see the example set (low tuition -> higher enrollment)?

Low tuition + Low academic requirements = the easy route to a job with brother-in-law working for the local government or for mommy's law firm or hanging shingle.

Plenty of non-TLS types who are street smart and make a good living scamming, er I mean representing, people who don't know better. I face these types of lawyers regularly and it's quite sickening how they scam your average joe. Don't need HYS to do that, any diploma mill will do.

[jingosaur]

factoring in 5% cost inflation on tuition, here are in-state numbers

1L $14,040
col: $20,238
total: $34,278

2L $14,742
col: $20,238
total: $34,980

3L $15,479
col: $20,238
total: $35,717

with loan fees of 220 per year and interest at 6.21%
assuming six month deferment
$4,812 in interest on 1L loans, $3,332 in interest on 2L loans, and $1,939 in interest on 3L loans
for a total of $10,743 in stafford loan fees and interest

unmet need:
$13,778 ($591 plus loan origination, $3,801 interest)
$14,480 ($621 plus loan origination, $2,752 interest)
$15,217 ($653 plus loan origination, $1,675 interest)

total principle: $104,975
total interest and fees: $20,836
grand total: $125,811

yeah great deal

This is a good example of how the entire law school model is inherently flawed to some extent. With the exception of the T14 and a few other schools, I think the legal profession as a whole would be best served with the apprenticeship model that used to be extremely common.

[Louis1127]

Perhaps their low tuition will force another, much more expensive Texas law to close, and then this law school actually will be helping the situation, albeit just barely? Just a thought. I know nothing about Texas. Do y'all think that could happen?

No. The only other LS in Dallas is SMU and they're not going anywhere. Texas A&M just bought Texas Wesleyan in Ft. Worth so it is becoming a public LS beginning this fall as well. If it had remained private, your scenario could have happened although I still doubt that. I think the schools are far enough apart that they can both survive.

Ah I was thinking that this new school might draw from other schools in different parts of the state. But I guess Texas is so big that won't happen.

[ilikebaseball]

I heard they are offering full rides to anyone willing to transfer from SMU? Haha damn. Maybe if youre paying sticker. But to transfer from the 2nd best law school in Texas (and a good school nonetheless) to a school that wont even be accredited in two years is idiotic. Plus, there's no housing anywhere near it. You've either gotta commute to downtown everyday, take the tram, or get an apartment in victory plaza for like 1000 bucks a month. Its gotta lot of work to do before it becomes an attractive option. Sure, its in downtown dallas, but they just slightly renovated an old ass building. The library is on like the 6th floor of it or something. No rec facilities, no campus, nothing. Just a building with the rest of the skyscrapers in downtown dallas.