tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post4149176081750911469..comments2024-02-23T04:59:26.907-05:00Comments on But I Did Everything Right!: Should 1L Year Tuition Be Free for Dropouts? An Illinois Law Professor Thinks So.Angelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07820446523257638689noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-10593241346932073362010-05-22T14:44:40.966-04:002010-05-22T14:44:40.966-04:00Good points, Anon @ 2:40pm.Good points, Anon @ 2:40pm.HardKnockshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08188805912579205968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-74833250066510995142010-05-22T14:40:25.694-04:002010-05-22T14:40:25.694-04:00Does anyone see the irony in proposing that they f...Does anyone see the irony in proposing that they forgive tuition when law schools wouldn't have to cut them one dime if they simply provided accurate and transparent employment stats? <br /><br />This prof has cleverly changed the subject to something that will never happen from something that absolutely should happen. By focusing attention on the the forgiveness of first year tuition which will never happen, she avoids discussing the accurate disclosure of employment stats. <br /><br />Not to mention, that even forgiving the first year's tuition is still a scam if the kids plop down 90K in the final 2 years with hopes of making 100k+. Its still a fraud and still a scam unless the employment stats are accurate. Let's not chase this red herring. <br /><br />the market will easily figure out that a law degree is worth about $10.00 when it is disclosed that you can get a 45K job which is not much more (if more at all) than what you could earn without. <br /><br />PLEASE STAY FOCUSED. Its accurate employment/salary data we need. Not tuition forgiveness.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-50400132606559169322010-05-22T10:47:06.973-04:002010-05-22T10:47:06.973-04:00These kids aren't dumb. I don't see them k...These kids aren't dumb. I don't see them knowingly throwing good money on top of bad. I think real problem is that they just don't know the true state of the legal job market. The 1Ls just aren't making an informed decision. <br /><br />Remember, you couldn't work your 1L year. Some Law Students don't start looking for legal work until they end of their 2L year. By this time, they have already invested four semesters into the degree. IF during their 1L year they discover a general hated the subject of Law, then a one year eject could work.The Yuppie Attorneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05697997369307991468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-53914316362686317422010-05-22T00:04:03.000-04:002010-05-22T00:04:03.000-04:00HK, she says that tuition should be deferred and t...HK, she says that tuition should be deferred and the only cost to the student would be the opportunity cost, so I think the previous commenter is correct; it's just a question of dividing the $90k in tuition in half rather than in 3rds.<br /><br />This wouldn't be a terrible idea, but I doubt any law school would go for it. The true sewers already kick their worst students out after one year in order to protect their bar passage rates, so they'd be losing big bucks.<br /><br />Also, with more and more students realizing it's top 10% or bust, there could be a major exodus from law school after the first year if one could escape with just paying the opportunity cost (i.e. going to law school for a year instead of working) and living expenses.<br /><br />Plus, psychologically, it could be harder to get away with charging two payments of $45k than three payments of $30k. People would probably be more hesitant to pay more money at one time - especially after seeing one's first year grades.<br /><br />My guess is that this would be too much of a threat to the scam for them to ever unilaterally accept this.Esq. Neverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18248019550876835145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-68404989610350112672010-05-21T20:35:15.599-04:002010-05-21T20:35:15.599-04:00I have NEVER been so proud of a professor at my al...I have NEVER been so proud of a professor at my alma mater. This is a great idea. And to be clear, I really enjoyed attending law school at U of I and am one of the fortunate ones who has managed to weather the Great Recession and is on a stable and secure career path in law (something that I am thankful for every single day).<br /><br />In addition to the comments above, I second what Angel said. If 1L tuition is free for those who drop out, law schools would be much more careful about who they admit, particularly the T3 and T4 schools, who seem to admit anyone with a pulse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-74128873189434430782010-05-21T19:22:47.514-04:002010-05-21T19:22:47.514-04:00Free in 2028: It's still requiring students to...Free in 2028: It's still requiring students to pay more second and third year to compensate for the $30k loss per student who drops out. I thought what she is saying is: charge $30k 1L year and then increase the tuition to $45k or more for 2L and 3L year to compensate for the loss of the dropouts. That would be an additional $30k per student who graduates to "subsidize" for the dropouts.HardKnockshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08188805912579205968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-86855254621192906692010-05-21T19:13:16.157-04:002010-05-21T19:13:16.157-04:00JJD: I agree, there should be some sort of tuition...JJD: I agree, there should be some sort of tuition repayment assistance program for unemployed graduates. I think some people would abuse a money back guarantee policy by purposely staying unemployed for a year to be released from a $200k loan burden. However, a tuition repayment program based on income would help grads who are unemployed or forced to find a low wage non-legal job.HardKnockshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08188805912579205968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-27493785714003706512010-05-21T19:07:25.267-04:002010-05-21T19:07:25.267-04:00I don't think a first year refund is a bad ide...I don't think a first year refund is a bad idea, but I'd rather see an entire refund if a law graduate can't find employment in the legal industry one year after graduation. Especially if the school is still telling incoming students that 99% of all their graduates get jobs.JJDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13336399876642935513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-44990663326175133842010-05-21T19:03:12.620-04:002010-05-21T19:03:12.620-04:00I think that she's full of crap. They get the ...I think that she's full of crap. They get the money back on transfer students if it's a semi-decent school. And if's not, they should try to admit people who will succeed in Law School and life, not every Tom, Dick and Mary.Angelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07820446523257638689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-41523279630496909812010-05-21T18:58:45.829-04:002010-05-21T18:58:45.829-04:00Where she loses me is her proposal to increase sec...<i>Where she loses me is her proposal to increase second and third year tuition to a whopping $45,000+ to "subsidize those who took the option". That is ridiculous. Second and third year students shouldn't have to subsidize for their classmates' decision to drop out.</i><br /><br />That's not what she's saying. She's saying to break the $90k tuition into 2 chunks of $45k apiece instead of 3 chunks of $30k. The "subsidy" portion is about going a bit higher than $45k apiece to cover the drop-out costs.<br /><br />Better idea: de-professionalize the law. No law school requirement, no bar exam, no restrictions on interstate work.Free in 2028http://www.mutualist.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5452025352696285200.post-148089595521460472010-05-21T18:32:18.166-04:002010-05-21T18:32:18.166-04:00This is an excellent idea! If my tuition bill had...This is an excellent idea! If my tuition bill had been cut in half or eliminated altogether after my first year, I probably would have exercised that option. And I would now be $80K richer. As for increasing second and third year tuition, I think this might make sense, but not to subsidize drop-out tuition. Rather, it would make students who choose to continue on, pay for their first year since they might actually benefit from it professionally. It's never gonna fly, though, simply because law schools have a lot to gain from the "sunk costs" state of mind.Recovering Lawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05216005842425651479noreply@blogger.com