Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism Forum

[Ohiobumpkin]

.

[spicyyoda17]

I feel like these 3 statements that he made don't really mesh well together:

"I don't consider it our responsibility to get students jobs."
"High tuition is a problem."
"It's important that they get jobs, that they can ultimately pay that debt back."

Other soundbites I enjoyed:

"We've got to pay for heating. We've got to pay for lighting."
"You can and you can't." (in regards to taking out 6-figured debt and then going to work in a very small community for low-income individuals after graduating)
"I'll tell you a story."
"I resisted becoming a dean."

[Ohiobumpkin]

.

[lovelaw27]

“It’s not clear to me there’s an over supply problem at all.” LMFAO

It takes a special kind of person to make that statement with a straight face.

[justonemoregame]

Apparently, if employment data was measured one year out instead of nine months, that would drastically change Case Western's employment score. This guy is such a soulless douche

[bdubs]

His quoted "financial aid" # is more than twice the ABA median grant amount listed for his school. Calling bullshit.

[justonemoregame]

He also claimed 90% receive grants - according to LSAC's Official Guide, it's 70%, and only 10% get a half-ride or more, so the 90% figure is actually representative of those students being ripped to shreds.

LSAC says median grant is $9,333, not $25,000

[TTRansfer]

What a douche.

[Tanicius]

I thought his point would be something along the lines of "Of course there's no shortage of lawyers - people are lining up behind courthouse doors trying to represent themselves. We need lawyers practically everywhere for these people!" Even though that point dodges the economic question, at least it's valid. Instead he ended up trying to argue people can actually get employment out of his school.

[Myself]

.

[Myself]

I don't understand how this dean can say externships cost law schools a lot of money. If an externship is where a law student works for free for a non-profit or government agency, and that same student is still paying the same tuition, how is that costing the law school?

I can't believe he also said there is no oversupply of lawyers. Stupid stupid stupid. I can't believe he's insinuating that law students are turning down jobs that are below them (e.g., "If law students contemplated going to smaller cities or doing into different kinds of law paths . . ."). His self-righteous and admonishing tone is insufferable.

I just love how he flippantly talks about how the state and federal government need lawyers and the only reason why students aren't going there is because students are just short-sighted, greedy bastards who won't accept lower pay. Sorry, but those positions are few and far between and usually competitive. And I love how he points out great his self-sacrifice of going into the low-paying legal education sector rather than staying in private practice.

[suralin]

This made me want to throw up just a little.

[Jaqen]

I feel like these 3 statements that he made don't really mesh well together:

"I don't consider it our responsibility to get students jobs."
"High tuition is a problem."
"It's important that they get jobs, that they can ultimately pay that debt back."

Other soundbites I enjoyed:

"We've got to pay for heating. We've got to pay for lighting."
"You can and you can't." (in regards to taking out 6-figured debt and then going to work in a very small community for low-income individuals after graduating)
"I'll tell you a story."
"I resisted becoming a dean."

Yeahhhh.

[timbs4339]

He also claimed 90% receive grants - according to LSAC's Official Guide, it's 70%, and only 10% get a half-ride or more, so the 90% figure is actually representative of those students being ripped to shreds.

LSAC says median grant is $9,333, not $25,000

Don't feel like watching the video again (just had lunch) but didn't he say 90% of our students are "receiving some form of financial aid?" That's usually deanspeak for "grants+loans."

[spleenworship]

I don't understand how this dean can say externships cost law schools a lot of money. If an externship is where a law student works for free for a non-profit or government agency, and that same student is still paying the same tuition, how is that costing the law school?

Yeah, externships are absolutely not costing schools money. I'm doing one this semester. I pay tuition, and one secretary and one professor are involved, but I'm paying tuition for the credits I get. And I had to find my own externship and supervisor. They didn't do anything until I had already set it up. The only one I'm costing any money to is the PDs office, and I would hope my work would make up for that.

[spleenworship]

He also claimed 90% receive grants - according to LSAC's Official Guide, it's 70%, and only 10% get a half-ride or more, so the 90% figure is actually representative of those students being ripped to shreds.

LSAC says median grant is $9,333, not $25,000

Don't feel like watching the video again (just had lunch) but didn't he say 90% of our students are "receiving some form of financial aid?" That's usually deanspeak for "grants+loans."

Yeah, I love how they lump loans in with financial aid. I mean, technically it is true, but it is misleading because many students hear financial aid and think of grants or scholarships... when in reality it is almost always just loans.

[ShitLawOrBust]

anyone care to actually engage the substance of his responses? they seem pretty cogent

[spleenworship]

anyone care to actually engage the substance of his responses? they seem pretty cogent

His responses/argument are literally so fantastical, overly optimistic, and blinded to the realities of the changing market that any engagement in "the substance of his responses" would be a pointless waste of time. Like arguing with a schizophrenic about the Jesus-Aliens and the need for tinfoil hats.

[bdubs]

anyone care to actually engage the substance of his responses? they seem pretty cogent

He refuses to recognize that the legal landscape has changed drastically and the students at his school no longer have the opportunities to do the myriad other things that he refers to. There are not going to be many (if any) CEOs generated by Case Western Law School in the next decade, but he speaks as though those opportunities are still available. He also intersperses his and his classmates experiences from Columbia in with those of Case Western students which is completely disingenuous.

Law school was a local game 30 years ago which is when he's referring to. Today, however, law schools compete on a national scale for students and employment opportunities. Employers have become more concentrated and national as well with firms growing, merging, and collapsing.

Bottom line is that the opportunities he's speaking of aren't there.

ETA: He acknowledges this when he says his students go to large cities to find work and "it takes them a long time" to find it. He just hasn't connected the dots that there isn't the employment in Ohio that used to make his school reasonable to attend.

[manofjustice]

This guy is evil--not willfully so, like an ax murder--but that kind of evil, not always less harmful, that flows from willful ignorance.

"We gotta keep the lights on.." You mean your high salaries you believe you deserve.

"There is no oversupply of lawyers..." You mean in your 'well reasoned' imagination. Market be dammed.

"I haven't, myself, looked at the [job] stats a year out." Requires no comment.

This guy gave a 15 minute interview and flapped a lot of hot air out of his mouth, when only one answer is required: "we will substantially lower class sizes, increase teaching loads, and reduce tuition."

[manofjustice]

Good interviewer: "so it's a business?" Dean: "yea!" Good interviewer: "so, don't businesses need to match supply with demand?" Dean: "no! no oversupply!" So you want them to work for poor people? And they'll pay their loans how?

[manofjustice]

Anyone notice how the Dean co-opoted mine and Dingbat's line of reasoning alla "passive versus active" investments that we fleshed out on this forum about five months ago?

[Tanicius]

anyone care to actually engage the substance of his responses? they seem pretty cogent

Perfect use of anon.

[Julio_El_Chavo]

I'll make a statement with about as much support in evidence as any of his: his law school won't exist in 10 years and he'll be unemployed.

[Punisha20]

Dean Mitchell: "Almost all of my classmates went to work for big firms in New York... 10 years later when they published the reunion book, almost nobody was at law firms"

um okay?