Law School Transparency: Discussions with Kyle

Earlier this week I pitched an idea to Kyle McEntee, the founder of Law School Transparency. For those of you that don't know, LST is a non-profit watchdog organization that was established with the hopes of getting the law schools to spill the truth on their employment statistics.  As Kimber covered in Shilling Me Softly, LST released the law schools' answers to their initial request for information.  Most of them, except for Ave Maria School of Law, declined citing reasons such as "compliance costs would be to great" or "privacy issues."  I admire what LST is doing, but I'm not surprised.  Even with the ABA's recent consideration of a proposal requiring that Law Schools provide accurate data to incoming students, the law schools are still resistant.
Well, back to my conversation with Kyle.  Here's was the idea that I pitched to him:

Why don't we go over the law schools' heads?  Why do we have to wait for them to comply with LST's requests?  With the scam bloggers' assistance, we can post a survey or a link to a survey on LST's website and ask the "people" what they are doing after grad school.  We can even open it up to graduates who, like me, are years out and now finding themselves living below the poverty level.  I realize that it would be nearly impossible to get 100% percent to report.  However, if we got 10 of 100 graduates from TTToilet school of law to answer the survey claiming that they are unemployed--that information would debunk the statistics of that same school which claim 95% employed 9 months after graduating.

Well, he had concerns.  One of the concerns he cited was verification.  For example, a spiteful law school grad could fill out the survey from several different ISPs claiming that he is unemployed to screw up the statistics for his school.  I, for one, would never lie on a survey like that.  I guess I feel like the truth is probably bad enough, why lie?  Plus, I really want to know the truth.  I'm curious.  But today, two comments on Hardknock's post earlier today made Kyle's concern very real to me:

EvrenSeven said...

It's a certainty that any student who participates in this program won't receive an employment survey from the school after 9 months, because they will already be considered "employed" and won't even have a chance to answer.

When I get mine, I'll be answering as "unemployed and searching" to make up for at least one person who hasn't responded to a survey in shame.

NOVEMBER 16, 2010 12:55 PM  

Anonymous said... 

Even though I was working, I made sure to put myself down as unemployed and searching when mine came.

NOVEMBER 16, 2010 2:41 PM  

Oops. I guess I don't understand the mindset of new grads.  His point came through loud and clear.

He had other concerns as well.  He doesn't want to discredit his organization by providing false statistics.  I guess the scam bloggers have been discredited.  I know that we're referred to as whiners, etc.  People want us to do something.  I think that my idea is the "something" that needs to be done.  I, unfortunately, have no idea how to go about doing it.
LST seems to have lots of faith in the ABA coming through with higher standards for law school.  Of course, I don't.  At the end of the day, I feel that the ABA (made up of Biglaw Partners) has an interest in keeping labor cheap.  I'm sure the organization would decrease tuition if it were in their power, so that the cheap labor wouldn't be so cash strapped.  If that is their real intent, then any proposal that would affect the number of law students that attend law school and slow down the flow of cheap labor as a result is not likely to be a priority of the ABA.  We differ on that point.
In any event, I'm fully behind LST in its efforts.  I hope that the ABA brings the hammer down on the law schools for defrauding students every year.  In the meantime, I feel the weight of 45,000 students on my shoulders every May and the pain that many of them must feel when their expectations are dashed.  I hope that I'm not considered a whiner.  My goal is to put the information out there for those that are open to it, and help steer some students correctly.  I know that everything we post is skewed by our opinions, but we're we aren't dishonest. We stand to gain nothing by telling people information we wish we knew before attending law school.  That is the God's honest truth.
So, what do you think of my idea?  Do you think its something I should approach LST with in the future (after the ABA doesn't deliver)?  If so, do you know how to do it?  Maybe we can talk.

Big Favor, BIDER Readers!

Every year, the ABA names the top 100 Blawgs.  It's the academy awards of Legal Blogs.  Since you're reading this now, I'm assuming you like BIDER and I'd love if you could nominate it for a top 100 spot.  Or, if you absolutely loathe and despise our content and writing, LEAVE.  No... don't. I'm totally joking.  BUT, feel free to nominate any scamblogger (See Blog Roll on the Side Bar) for the honor.  It would be magnificent if any of the scam blogs made the list since it will receive some great publicity and the message could spread far and wide.

Use the form located here.  Thank you so much!

I'm so confused...

I ran into this story on-line and I didn't quite understand what the hell all those Idaho peeps are thinking.  Too many potatoes in their diet, me thinks.  Apparently, University of Idaho, which already has a law school in Moscow, which is 3rd tier, wants to open up a three year program in Boise.  But they seem to already be offering classes in Boise.  So, what gives?  Do they feel they did such a shit job with a third tier toilet in Moscow, Idaho that they want to try again with a clean slate in Boise?


The Idaho State Board of Education rejected this proposition as too expensive, but UI is going ahead with this idea.  UI is still waiting for the ABA to approve this new business venture, a procedure called "acquiescence."  We all know that the ABA will approve them because the ABA approves all law schools.   But the alleged concern of the ABA would be whether this new campus would harm the Moscow Campus' programs.


I don't understand why the University of Idaho, with one third rate toilet under its belt, would like to open yet another.  Also, I don't understand why a state school can ignore the state Board of Education--and go ahead and open this campus.


If UI was so concerned that they are the only state without a campus in the State Capital--like that's important--why don't they just move the campus from Moscow to Boise????


As it stands, it's not like Boise will be without a law school.  University of Portland, Oregon is going to be offering law schools in Boise in 2011.  Of course, the logical question is why would University of Portland, aka Concordia, want to build a school in Boise??

Why Boise? Portland already has Lewis & Clark Law School and nearby there's Willamette University College of Law in Salem. Concordia has a strong connection to Boise because a good number of students and donors as well as several board members hail from there. 


So, let me get this straight.  University of Portland is trying to escape competition with Lewis & Clark and Williamette, so they are opening up a law school in Boise, Idaho.  And UI is going to strangle the market in Boise by opening up a SECOND campus there.  Do they realize that the population of Boise is only 200,000?  How many lawyers does such a small area need?


Admittedly, I don't have a large readership in Idaho... and, if I were a betting person and I must be because I went to Law School and bet that I could have a good life as a lawyer.... I would say that it's because the state is serviced by UI Moscow ONLY which has a total number of 300 students.  So, with the introduction of Concordia and UI Boise, the market for lawyers in Idaho is bound to tank.  Why are they trying to fuck up a good thing?  


Well, it's a matter of time before I'll be welcoming a large amount of readers from Idaho.  Sorry to hear about your loss... loss of jobs, that is.  

No More Room at the Bench! The ABA speaks!!!

Surely, by now, you've heard of the above-titled article by Mark Greenbaum. It was among one of the first mainstream media articles that addressed the oversupply of lawyers and asked that the ABA become accountable for its sins--namely, failing to regulate law schools. Well, there's been a response!

Here are portions of ABA President Carolyn Lamm's Letter to the Editor, in pertinent part--which I lifted from ATL.  My comments are in grey:


To the Editor:

You published a recent opinion piece by Mark Greenbaum. His analysis is premised on incorrect facts from which he draws flawed conclusions. He misstates the number of American Bar Association-approved law schools, ties it to what he describes as a “flood of graduates,” and insists the ABA should “block” new schools. He fails to acknowledge that in fact existing law schools have reduced voluntarily class size and therefore despite a minimal increase in the number of accredited law schools (7% over a 5 year period) first year enrollment grew by only two percent. Hardly producing a “flood of graduates”.

First of all, the flood started in the late 90s--not since the Great Recession.  I have yet to hear about a law school that is voluntarily reducing its class size. I would venture to say that is a fib.  However, I have heard that applications are up 20% and that New York Law School, for example, is expecting 50% more first years this coming school year. That is an additional 250 attorneys when New York City cannot support the tens of thousands of attorneys it currently houses.

Big Shout Out for ESQNever!!!!

EsqNever was featured prominently in the National Law Journal today!  I'm so proud of him, as a fellow blogger.  You have to see his "Law School Carol," if you haven't yet.  You should also forward it to friends.



The message is getting out!!!!  And the article taught me something new. I now hate the ABA and the NALP.  Self-reporting, my ass.  Just call it blatant lies. It's not possible that 23% of all law school grads land jobs earning $160K.  There's not even that many $160K jobs available out there!
DOWN WITH THE ABA!