Could There Be Accreditation for Distance Learning Law Schools in the Not-So Distant Future?
Last month, Ross Mitchell made headlines when he became the first online law school graduate to be admitted to the Massachusetts bar.
Mitchell, 57, is a computer systems and management consultant. We’re not sure exactly what that is, but it requires him to travel frequently between California and his home in Massachusetts. He decided he wanted to get a law degree to enhance what he could offer to his clients. The online-only Concord Law School which is owned by Kaplan (which is owned in turn by the Washington Post) offered a flexible educational option. He got his law degree from Concord University in 2004.
He passed the bar in California - it’s the one bar exam that Concord grads can take directly out of the program - in 2004. Other states allow Concord grads who have passed the California bar to sit for their bar exams, but Massachusetts is not one of them. The Mass. Board of Bar Examiners requires that bar takers have a degree from an accredited law school.
Mitchell sued the Mass. Board of Bar Examiners, challenging the constitutionality of that rule. He didn’t succeed in getting the state to change the rule, but he did get a waiver so that he could take the bar. He still hopes the Board of Bar Examiners will change its rules.
Or maybe they won’t have to. As we have mentioned before, the American Bar Association is in the midst of reviewing law school accreditation. Not only are they putting a focus on measuring student outcomes, they’re reviewing Standard 306, which governs “distance education” a.k.a. online programs. From the ABA website:
Currently, there are not any law schools approved by the ABA that provide a J.D. degree completely via correspondence study.
The ABA Standards Review Committee plans to issue a new review of Standard 306 in Fall 2010. If there’s to be a focus on “student outcomes,” the Committee might want to take this year’s ACS moot court competition under consideration. Apparently, Concord law students gave Stanford law students a run for their money.
More on Concord v. Stanford, Ross Mitchell, and the merits of an online law degree, after the jump.
First off, the ACS Moot Court Competition. The final round of the competition pitted Concord against Stanford, and the online-only program did quite well against the T5 school, according to a (non-Concord) ATL reader:
There was no upset, but it was extremely close. I would have ranked them as follows:1. Concord’s First Speaker
2. Stanford’s First Speaker
3. Stanford’s Second Speaker
4. Concord’s Second SpeakerThe Concord guy was definitely the best out of the group. He was well into his 40s, perhaps 50s.
I just found it ironic that an unaccredited online law school owned by Kaplan was able to get that far in any sort of competition.
Others found it more intriguing than ironic. Concord Law School Dean Barry Currier wrote at Rethinking Higher Education:
How, then, could it happen that two Concord Law students could succeed in this competition against students from law schools such as the University of Michigan, Duke, Berkeley, Wayne State, and others (there were close to 30 teams entered)?Certainly a lot of it has to do with the students. Graduates of Air Force Academy and Vanderbilt (with an MBA on top of her undergraduate degree), Tom and Marjorie are accomplished professionals who are now pursuing a law degree. Some of it has to do with good coaching. Most law schools support their moot court teams with a coach from the faculty or the local legal community. We are lucky to have the help of Los Angeles attorney David Glassman, who has more than 20 years of experience as an appellate lawyer and enjoys working with our students.
Could it also be that there’s a solid and rigorous program of legal education at Concord that pushes Marjorie, Tom, and their classmates to learn the law and to learn to “think like a lawyer”? Could it be that the cyber hallways of Concord have the interactivity, collegiality, and professionalism that is in the air in the brick/mortar hallways of traditional law schools? Could it be that the faculty of our online school are providing a level of instruction and insight that helped prepare Marjorie and Tom for the competition that they faced in this competition? Were they just lucky?
Ross Mitchell has high praise for the program that got him admitted to the California and Massachusetts bars, though he’s frustrated that “you could be the best law school in the nation but if you’re online, you can’t be accredited.”
In fact, there are distance learning programs that are accredited, as they are run by and affiliated with accredited schools; Stanford University, for example, actually has such a program, according to an ABA spokesperson.
Mitchell said there were certain traditional aspects to his Concord law school experience. Students gather, if online, for classes during the course of the four-year program. They listen to pre-recorded lectures - Mitchell had Arthur Miller for Civ Pro this way; then Concord professors lead live discussions about the material. “Like any law school, it’s mostly about the reading,” Mitchell said.
He’s still in touch with fellow graduates. There is an alumni association online, though he did not meet his classmates until a year into the program, when they all gathered in California for their first year law exam.
The students tend to be middle-aged, and to come from across the country and from a wide variety of fields. His class included airline pilots and doctors, who always wanted to study law. “It’s an exciting place to go to school, because everyone’s there because they want to be there,” Mitchell said.
There are definite savings to be had. Concord costs $9,500 per year.
Mitchell’s daughter, 24, followed in her father’s law steps by going to law school, though at an earlier age and to an accredited school. She is now a 2L at Suffolk University Law School. His goal was to be admitted to the Massachusetts bar before her.
“I’m very high on [distance learning programs]. Not to say my daughter is not getting a great education,” said Mitchell, who talked with her about reducing the costs of law school by going to Concord. “But she said to me, ‘I want to go to a school where I can decide to go to any state in the country and be an attorney.’”
We’ll see what the ABA has to say about that in 2010. You can have your say as well. An ABA spokesperson wrote us:
The Standards Review Committee will produce a report on recommended changes to the standards when it finishes its work, and it will then hold public hearings. But even before then, it is seeking comment… [I]t would be lovely if you included in your story the following line: Comments and suggestions should be sent to Charlotte Stretch, Assistant Consultant, stretchc@staff.abanet.org.
Web degree no bar for this lawyer [Boston Herald]
ROSS E. MITCHELL vs. BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS [Social Law Library]
Court win for online law school grad [California Bar Journal]
Non-Traditional Law Students and Moot Court [Rethinking Higher Education]
(89) 
Comments
FIRST!!!!!!!!!
FIRST!!!!!!!!!
Good lord - we have more than enough law schools as is! ABA is the WORST organization in the history of organizations.
1 - Phoenix University
2 - Harvard
I am a Seton Hall summer at Orrick. Should I be scared?
Nice. While not a threat to biglaw associates, this presents a competitive disadvantge to solos who will be undercut by lawyers who, due to thier reduced debt load, can charge lower fees. Way to kick 'em when they are down...
Quite exciting, this computer magic! Out with the "socratic method" and in with the "first-person shooter method." Out with the professor humiliating you, and in with the professor pwning you. Out with "summa cum laude," and in with "high score." Smashing!
Doc Review to $8/hr.
Will ATL be the virtual "law review" of Concord University Online School of Law?
Will an online JD be the true ticket to any other profession?
How is that guy's head staying on his neck?
Damn. For someone who should know a thing or two about abusing antitrust exemptions, the state bars really suck at the whole protectionism thing...
Asslobster Polytechnic Institute of Admiralty Law of Gloucester
What is it about moot court competitions that inverts the great chain of being? For example, "South Texas College of Law, Houston's Oldest Law School," consistently outperforms elite law schools in the City Bar's National Moot Court Competition, generally regarded as the most prestigious of the now reproducing-like-bunnies moot court competitions in this country. Could it be that moot court rewards glibness more than intelligence and form more than substance. Any dean who thinks success in a moot court competition is evidence of academic prowess is a fool, a snake oil salesman, or both.
Another take on the ACS competition - the worst students at Stanford beat the best at Concord.
In the present day with the economy the way it is and all the Millions of people out of work. This might not be a good time to do this. It is better to have a job then to be unemployed currently. Unemployment is currently at 9% or better and it does not look like it will change soon.
Small business will have to let people go and large corporations will not hire or they will send jobs overseas.
I am being realistic not going on emotion or what we would all like it to be.
Go away David Saint Hubbins. Loser.
Oh god -- is this what it's come to?
First- you can't learn to be a lawyer in your basement. The law school system has its flaws, but I honestly believe that three years in that environment produces more competent counselors.
My wife got an online degree. While it suited her needs, I have to say that the quality of education was pathetic.
Second - this is a threat to the profession. If we allow anyone who can click a website to sit for the bar, then if we keep bar standards where they are then failed bar attempts are bound to increase. If the bar passage rate were to decline to 50% or so, then it would be very hard for a prospective student to justify the investment of a law school education.
California should be ashamed of itself.
About time. Maybe some $9,500/year competition from online schools will draw students away from the $40k/year brick-and-mortar TTT schools and thus lower their tuition. The low debt means they can provide some affordable legal services.
But for students who already went to those overpriced TTT schools, sorry you overpaid for the higher education bubble. Maybe next time don't listen to the liberals who say that any type of education is a fundamental right and an unqualified good no matter the cost, okay?
Wait, people can actually graduate from an online law school? I thought that was a joke! WTF?!! This is nuts! Do they even have an career center and/or some form of OCI despite not having a physical campus?? Would any self-respecting law firm ever hire someone from this shithole? I presume the answer is a resounding "NO"
19 - OCIs are handled via chat rooms. A very professional feel to it all.
Why didn't he just get an equivalent education at a bricks and mortar community college law school like Suffolk Law School?
minimal competence required...similar to the SCOTUS seat reserved for SotomayOOOOORRRRRR
"But she said to me, 'I want to go to a school where I can decide to go to any state in the country and be an attorney.'"
And so she went to Suffolk?!?
I don't doubt that this guy could be a capable lawyer. There are lots of people out there who could be lawyers without attending an actual law school. Back in the day, many great jurists did not have the benefit of a legal education.
But that's beside the point.
The point is that the law school requirement is about helping everyone to meet the minimum standard. While this guy may not have needed an actual law school, I do not doubt that the vast majority of Concord graduates will be screwed without the benefit of a formal, physical program.
Standards in this profession are on the decline. Letting people point and click their way into lawyerhood will only accelerate the rot.
There's no excuse for this. We need to stop destroying our profession. I for one plan to get more involved with my ABA.
11 has asked the most pertinent question of all.
http://www.concordlawschool.edu/law-school-admissions.asp
2 questions:
1) If you google "concord law school" you will see that the first hit is a link to the school's website. The description says "earn an accredited law degree at home." Did the ABA really accredit this dump??
2) If you click the above admissions link, you will notice the obvious absence of an LSAT requirement. Instead, it appears as though you can gain admission by taking the "Concord Online Admissions Test." Is this serious? These [destined for failure] students didn't even have to take the LSAT???
If the answer to either of my questions is yes, i am withdrawing from the ABA and demanding a return of all dues paid. What a fucking joke.
-19
Let them take the bar, just raise the standards for bar admission. Too many people pass the damn thing already. Should also add in a three strikes rule, fail three times and no more testing for you.
I can't wait to see the ads for this during law 'n' order episodes.
"Do you want to be a lawyer? Sure! We all do!"
Word on the street is that Ross Mitchell also has an expired patent on a jetlag watch....and aside from his daughter's aspiring legal skills, she also makes a mean Origami flower.
www.jetlag.com
It's hard to pound a classmate in the ass over the internet. Some things have to be done in person, face-to-face (or face to back of head). I mean, who really gives a damn whether their lawyer graduated from HLS or from the back of a matchbook cover, since both are likely dishonest and out to steal you blind.
"Distance learning" in general is a horrible idea. It just doesn't work.
Why doesn't your firm let you do all your work at home instead of at the office? Because people turn out shitty work product when they are writing in their pajamas.
This is an unfortunate, but natural, outgrowth of what has occured at the undergrad level. For some reason, people have been convincedthat post-secondary education is a requirement that all should have access to. This thinking has caused a massive devaluing of an undergrad degree. It is logical, then, that these same people think that law school should be approached in the same way. I, for one, can not wait to see all the TV ads for onlnie law shools akin to to Devry and ITT Tech. While this will devalue TTT such as Suffolk, Gonzaga, and Fordahm, it really will not matter much to anyone who attends a real law school.
That guy doesn't have a neck! What does he wear, a size 8 collar? He looks like a freakin bobble-head.
17 - "you can't learn to be a lawyer in your basement" really? I think most law students should get used to working in a basement...
No! We should be making it more difficult to get a JD, not more convenient.
What a travesty--
Nothing like being ridiculed in front of 150+ people
the most brilliant persons you will ever know in one place--when you are hopelessly unprepared, tired, scared and undersexed.
And not knowing which class, on which day you will be
called. Welcome to the crucible of the Socratic method.
I loved the Profs. who after you were called would put your name-card back in their deck--so you could be called the following today.
How would one approximate this online?
Like lightning to the lightning bug.
Some of these schools have a zero bar passage rate.
More importantly, how does a uber-geek, socially maladroit, ugly Law Prof. hit on the scared 1yrs.
The sanctity of this tradition can not die!
What next the ending of compulsory Greek at Dupont?
I for one would not attend an online law school, and the school may be a joke, but that does not necessarily make the students who attend such a school idiots.
The ABA is the devil
Suffolk Law is the Cardozo of Community Colleges
These are the exceptions that prove the rule.
The Concord team did will in SPITE of the Concord
education. Take a random student at the 2 schools or the average and the there will be a huge gap.
Lets face it--admissions people are not clairvoyant. Socrates never went to College.
You can be a mensa and enroll anywhere--you are still a mensa. The school did not make you a mensa.
Debate is so subjective anyways. Concords student seem like mature ringers than atypical law student.
Similar to the ghetto high-schools that when the debate/academic decathelon over some prestigious prep school.
Yes the ghetto schools still suck--but there can be very bright people the ghetto school, who working off their ass can do well.
It is just everything else about the school sucks. And there are few things more stratified and outcome determinative than a t-20 law school and a non t-20.
The language shows no evidence any of the above commenters attended any law school. On the other hand, Mr. Mitchell dispatched the Bar Association lawyer fairly easily in his pro se appeal before the Mass Supreme Court. As a client, that is what I am looking for in a lawyer.
The link in the second paragraph of the article is wrong. The link, concord.edu, is for Concord University, a state liberal arts school in West Virginia. It is not the same as "Concord Law School."
"It's an exciting place to go to school, because everyone's there because they want to be there," Mitchell said.
Except you don't actually go there. And no one is actually there. And it's not a place. And it's a horrible law school.
I guess this is a good idea. There is basically no difference between T4-T50, and little difference between the second tier (T50+). Who the hell cares if a shitty school is online or in a building. This ultimately is the minor league training ground for lawyers. If these people get a rudimentary legal education and not come out with a ton of debt, then more power to them.
Thankfully, engineering is too complex to be completed online and ABET would never allow it to happen. Let's hope the same for medicine. YIKES
"On the other hand, Mr. Mitchell dispatched the Bar Association lawyer fairly easily in his pro se appeal before the Mass Supreme Court."
As far as I can tell, his entire argument was "I can be a good lawyer! Standards aren't fair!" I guess he also brought an equal protection claim that was completely baseless.
17... your illogical ramblings make no sense. You must be e a recent grad from an accredited law school.
The market should decide if 3 years of bull shit (I mean, of accredited law school education) is necessary to be a competent counselor, not you. You "honestly believe that three years in that environment produces more competent counselors," but you can produce no reason why.
3 years practicing, along with Bar prep and passage, would make a one a *much*, *much* more competent counselor then any 1st year associate... since he would have actual real world experience. California has it right. Let the Bar be the bar. Law school should be a choice for someone who wants to be a counselor... not a mandate set in stone by the likes of you.
I cannot believe the ABA does not make it mandatory that one must be involved in clinics (similar to strict engineering laboratory requirements by ABET) to keep online agencies from doing this to the practice of law. If they mandated certain things it could be easy to shut this down. But, after all is said and done, this seems to just be more of a nuisance than a real threat.
47 - the whole point of having professional training standards is to protect the market from low quality.
If there were no professional standards for doctors, then of course some people would go to cheap, untrained doctors. There might even be a few of those doctors who were as capable and competent as trained physicians. But on the whole it would lead to charlatanism and tragic results.
I think we can all agree that the bar exam is not a serious barrier to entry. Historically, the barrier to entry to the profession is at the law school level. For a long time this was an effective quality control, because a certain level of capability was required to get into law school. But lately, law schools have proliferated and getting in is no longer the barrier it once was. As a result, the market is being flooded with incompetent lawyers from un-selective institutions.
Small wonder why lawyers are no longer respected in this country.
There are online law schools? Huh. Why don't I meet these people at CalBar functions?
Oh yeah, because they don't pass the bar because they either weren't competent in the first place or because their law school education was a sham.
49,
California (with one of the lowest passage rates of any Bar exam) shows that, when the accredited law school requirement is done away with, the bar exam does become the barrier to entry it should be.
Most clients would take someone with 3 years practice experience in the relevant area (who has passed the bar) over a typical 1st year associate any day of the week. The market speaks, but it is hard to hear it from all the way up in that Ivory Tower.
"If there were no professional standards for doctors... it would lead to charlatanism and tragic results." Oh please, lose the straw man. This is about the legal profession. Plus, I'm saying there *should* be a professional standard. I just want the Bar to the be bar, not 3 years of bullshit ramblings by "professors" who don't even practice much law.
21, at least Suffolk has a decent law school building. Northeastern had tons of rubble fall from one of their buildings' roofs today - http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/decorative_trim_1.html
This news is sadly predictable. I'm waiting for the ABA to accredit prelaw programs at liberal arts schools, or for certified paralegals to have standing to take the bar.
Unemployed Northeastern Law '07
26: "Concord Law School of Kaplan University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and a member of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA.*)"
http://info.concordlawschool.edu/Pages/Accreditation.aspx?ID=Accreditation
They are not ABA Accredited-- that's the whole point.
Subtle Wayne State trolling.
Suffolk Law is better than the Michigan State College of Law.
49, "Historically, the barrier to entry to the profession is at the law school level. ... the market is being flooded with incompetent lawyers from un-selective institutions."
Um, no, historically, there was no barrier to entry to the profession. What law school did Lincoln go to? Real bar exams didn't even exist in most states until the 20th century, yet legal clients back then were doing ok despite the "flood" of lawyers that apparently occur when there are no barriers to entry.
It's amazing that so many lawyers are so hung up on their protectionist "quality control" rhetoric because they're afraid of competition. So sad , yet so hilarious. Don't think about going into business, guys, because apparently anyone, even those without MBAs, can start their own businesses.
I agree with 27. Make the bar tougher, and set a limit to how many chances people have to take it. Then abolish the requirement for a law degree altogether.
I'll be a 3L at Columbia. I skip a lot of my classes (the larger ones I can get away with) most of the time, and when I show up I hardly pay attention anyway. I learn from reading books. My grades are better than average here and I'm on track for a good biglaw job. The only thing Columbia did for me was let me put their name on my resume and set up on campus recruiting.
57 - congratulations on wasting a rare opportunity. I benefitted immensely from my CLS professors. Profs. Coffee and Farnsworth shaped the way I think about the law. I'm always amazed at how much effort people expend to attend top institutions only to waste it.
I really hope my firm didn't hire you. If we did, I'm afraid you won't succeed.
As for correspondence schools getting accredited by the ABA, I really hope our profession has more self-respect than that. There is no substitute for live instruction. Law schools need less computers and more human interaction.
Are you a lawyer? Probably not! Attorney Matricia Johnsonsenstein-Braddox will sue anyone keeping YOU from YOUR legal right of ALSO becoming a Lawyer!!!
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/11020ef505/are-you-a-lawyer-probably-not-from-themidnightshow
57 here.
58- so everyone has to learn the same way you do? I'll be an excellent lawyer because I'll know the law, I'm brilliant, and I work hard. I didn't need to sit in lectures to have that.
And I guess I should make a minor correction to my previous post: I agree that some professors can be entertaining or interesting to listen to. Sometimes. I just don't think that has much to do with becoming a good lawyer. So after my statement "The only thing Columbia did for me" I'd like to append "educationally and professionally." (Some lunchtime lectures were interesting too. I even got free pizza.) And every big-firm and former big-firm lawyer I've ever asked about classes has told me that it doesn't matter which classes I take because they learned everything they need after law school, practicing law, and that they don't remember anything from their classes.
Once again the ATL comments show what an ignorant bunch of prestige whores graduate from T14 schools.
There are thousands of professionals like him that want a law degree and can make good use of it, but can't spare three years to attend law school full-time or go to regular night school classes.
I have known a student who was an accountant, who now practices tax law and business formation. After four years was made partner at a mid-size firm. There was an environmental engineer, who had five associates working for him until last year.
The professionals who attend law school come with built-in work experience and contacts. The lucky few are able to attend part time, but most are shut out by the high entry barrier. Imagine how far that entry barrier plummets once law school is available online.
Yes, most will never practice big law, but maybe they take the in-house counsel spots at the companies for who they work or maybe they will take a few clients that would have gone to a big law.
This just another reason big law is doomed.
Once again the ATL comments show what an ignorant bunch of prestige whores graduate from T14 schools.
There are thousands of professionals like him that want a law degree and can make good use of it, but can't spare three years to attend law school full-time or go to regular night school classes.
I have known a student who was an accountant, who now practices tax law and business formation. After four years was made partner at a mid-size firm. There was an environmental engineer, who had five associates working for him until last year.
The professionals who attend law school come with built-in work experience and contacts. The lucky few are able to attend part time, but most are shut out by the high entry barrier. Imagine how far that entry barrier plummets once law school is available online.
Yes, most will never practice big law, but maybe they take the in-house counsel spots at the companies for who they work or maybe they will take a few clients that would have gone to a big law.
This just another reason big law is doomed.
Once again the ATL comments show what an ignorant bunch of prestige whores graduate from T14 schools.
There are thousands of professionals like him that want a law degree and can make good use of it, but can't spare three years to attend law school full-time or go to regular night school classes.
I have known a student who was an accountant, who now practices tax law and business formation. After four years was made partner at a mid-size firm. There was an environmental engineer, who had five associates working for him until last year.
The professionals who attend law school come with built-in work experience and contacts. The lucky few are able to attend part time, but most are shut out by the high entry barrier. Imagine how far that entry barrier plummets once law school is available online.
Yes, most will never practice big law, but maybe they take the in-house counsel spots at the companies for who they work or maybe they will take a few clients that would have gone to a big law.
This just another reason big law is doomed.
Once again the ATL comments show what an ignorant bunch of prestige whores graduate from T14 schools.
There are thousands of professionals like him that want a law degree and can make good use of it, but can't spare three years to attend law school full-time or go to regular night school classes.
I have known a student who was an accountant, who now practices tax law and business formation. After four years was made partner at a mid-size firm. There was an environmental engineer, who had five associates working for him until last year.
The professionals who attend law school come with built-in work experience and contacts. The lucky few are able to attend part time, but most are shut out by the high entry barrier. Imagine how far that entry barrier plummets once law school is available online.
Yes, most will never practice big law, but maybe they take the in-house counsel spots at the companies for who they work or maybe they will take a few clients that would have gone to a big law.
This just another reason big law is doomed.
Once again the ATL comments show what an ignorant bunch of prestige whores graduate from T14 schools.
There are thousands of professionals like him that want a law degree and can make good use of it, but can't spare three years to attend law school full-time or go to regular night school classes.
I have known a student who was an accountant, who now practices tax law and business formation. After four years was made partner at a mid-size firm. There was an environmental engineer, who had five associates working for him until last year.
The professionals who attend law school come with built-in work experience and contacts. The lucky few are able to attend part time, but most are shut out by the high entry barrier. Imagine how far that entry barrier plummets once law school is available online.
Yes, most will never practice big law, but maybe they take the in-house counsel spots at the companies for who they work or maybe they will take a few clients that would have gone to a big law.
This just another reason big law is doomed.
"As far as I can tell, his entire argument was "I can be a good lawyer! Standards aren't fair!" I guess he also brought an equal protection claim that was completely baseless."
OK. Tell us about your first matter out of law school. Mr. Mitchell prevailed in appellate advocacy, and resoundingly.
I was rejected by concord and accepted
to Stanford UCLA And USC
maybe it was my internet chat interview that did me in.
Query--did this mock debate take place online?
"you could be the best law school in the nation but if you're online, you can't be accredited."
You could be the best law school in the nation, but if you're online, you aren't.
Law school in this country has its flaws. For one thing there needs to be more emphasis on practical training. But just because law school sucks doesn't mean we should start accrediting these diploma mills because they also suck. The answer is to raise standards and make real law schools suck less.
Me like to go to
law school--do Concord have gud football team?
DO you need any high school.
Me home shool learned and want
to be go to concord/
me like Dean's picture--him smart.
kaplan make best ged books--best JD in world.
Me want concord law sweatshirt--show off at fle market--me laughing how smaart I be
The critics of Concord and online legal education generally haven't a clue what they are talking about. Concord graduates are generally not wet-behind-the-ears students but have an average age in the 40's and are already very successful in other fields - there are numerous MDs, PhDs, Profesors, etc. etc. There have been congressmen, world experts in various fields, and so on. Indeed, the thoughtless insulting comments left here indicate how clueless many B&M law school graduates must be! Concord graduates work damn hard, usually while holding down other full-time jobs - indeed, at least one graduate studied while deployed in the middle east while serving his country. It takes an incredible commitment and hard work to succeed at Concord and the standards required there are just as demanding as any other law school and if their students pass the Bar exam, why shouldn't they practice? There is so much self-aggrandizement from B&M graduates and their ignorance of Concord's methods and the quality of education received is all too apparent. I would suggest they actually meet with a few Concord alumni and find out the truth about them before they criticize.
I, of course, am a Concord graduate, indeed valedictorian July 2005. I studied every night until 2-3 a.m. , using the exact same hornbooks and casebooks as any other law school students, while working full-time and fostering and adopting multiple kids. Indeed, one of my classes was actually offered by Cornell Law School, for which I got an "A" grade, so I can only assume I achieved a typical Cornell "A" grade standard, despite only using a mouse (and the keyboard occasionally!)! My wife sacrificed so much to enable me to study and it frustrates me beyond words when I read the narrow-minded, self-important attitudes expressed in many of these comments.
As for Ross Mitchell, as someone who knows him personally, he is an incredibly intelligent man who would run rings around most attorneys.
So, my message to critical B&M law school graduates would be, grow up, and prove your law school is better by your work, not by slinging adolescent, imbecilic and groundless insults.
Ian Feavearyear J.D., B.A.
Ian:
1, you are an idiot for including your name. A simple google search will reveal you facebook and linkedin pages (it also reveals that you do NOT work in biglaw; what a suprise, I thought all Concord law grads had bigtime legal jobs??)
2, you posted your comment at 5:00 a.m. No one is going to respond here, as ATL has already started new threads. As such, you have not received the ridicule you deserve for this post. I'm going to do you a favor and cut and paste this into some more recent threads. Dumbass.
When it is all said and done, how is this any different than what "law schools" like Widener and Thomas Cooley are doing right now?
Thomas Cooley should be shut down. Widener should close its terrible Harrisburg campus (its DE campus isn't all that bad).
Widener Harrisburg is a legal atrocity. Slight retardation is an admissions requirement.
Quit making fun of Suffolk University Law School - you guys are chumps. Its not even funny to compare an online degree to Suffolk J.D.s
Went to Suffolk and am now at Biglaw pulling down six-figures.
The only people who make fun of suffolk went to crappy schools and can't get a job in Boston. The top firms in Beantown all have Suffolk J.D.s (top 10% only obviously).
The point is Massachusetts did itself a huge disservice letting this knark sit for the bar - I feel bad for anyone who hires him to represent them.
76, did you just defend Suffolk by admitting it's a regional school and only the top 10% of its graduates have a shot at biglaw? With friends like you....
The use and power of the Concord animal is yet unknown. Concord itself has not appreciated it. It wants to be an ordinary law school. There are 500,000 too many lawyers in the country, and the profession is in utter failure in every goal of every law subject. The lawyer destroys $million of value every year left alive.
Most Concord students have another career. Their training means, they know some law and understand the facts of the matter. Other professionals know the facts, but no law. Lawyers know law but no facts. Their real world experience was to sell french fries on the boardwalk, summers. Someone who knows the law and the facts, the law savvy party, can potentially devastate the know nothing lawyer.
We need no more lawyers. About a third of schools should be closed by force. Start with the Top Tier. All indoctrinate students into hatred of America.
Law savvy parties can protect us from the pestilential vermin that is the lawyer profession.
72--what percentage of lawyers work in biglaw? What percentage of then wish they didn't?
There is a lot more lawyering going on in this country than on Wall Street. Not everyone has this aspiration.
72--what percentage of lawyers work in biglaw? What percentage of them wish they didn't?
There is a lot more lawyering going on in this country than on Wall Street. Not everyone has this aspiration.
72 - Yawn, whatever. I'm so glad that we have traditional law schools to produce such mature individuals as yourself who make humungous assumptions based on practically no information whatsoever. I hope you do a better job of writing briefs.
I wonder how many people would hire you if they saw your comment(s) . . . perhaps that's why you haven't the guts to put your name to them?
Why work in big law, and start at the bottom for the second time in a lifetime? Concord grads have established careers and are experts at their subject. They have mid career positions, go up from there, enhanced by the legal education. They are making like full partners as students, why sacrifice any of that to be supervised by insufferable law office functonaries.
Another Concord Law School graduate here. After a career in telecommunications, I decided to go to law school, and having no ambition to go to a prestigious law school, I saved a lot of money by going to Concord. I passed the California Bar, widely regarded as the toughest in the nation, on my first try.
We had lots of interaction in our classes. Probably more than the usual B/M school. Instead of the professor questioning only one student, he or she would question the whole class, and all students could respond. The professor would comment on the responses (sometimes privately if someone was confusingly off track). Plus, you could email the professor about anything you didn't understand, and always get a very prompt response. The only thing missing was the humiliation. How sad to have missed that.
Not being burdened with debt from getting my JD, I am able to practice as appointed counsel in juvenile dependency cases, work I find very fulfilling.
People who have had legal training should have enough pride to check the facts before they spout off making comments that only reveal their ignorance.
dusky
This is an interesting story. Who says on site legal education is necessary (or, for that matter, confers any special benefit) in the internet technology era?
Conversely, there is a law school arrayed over various locations/sites in Michigan which is explicitly dedicated to enrolling the academically worst students who want to be lawyers. This business model to the point of garnering the spread between the actual cost of educating lawyers on site and tuition rates which can be charged to people who are desperate (and desperately unfit) to join the profession, lack of job prospects withal.
This law school, Thomas Cooley, is designed around the concept of a three year bar review course. [A subsidiary concept of the theory that if you place enough monkeys in front of enough typewriters, sooner or later the Encyclopedia Britannica will materialize.] Hence, it occasionally produces people who pass the bar examination (although its bar passage rate is abysmal in relativity and in raw percentage terms). The result of this, however, is that the operative standard of law practice (viz. the aggregate and unit levels of practitioner skills) in Michigan has declined almost in direct relation to (ever expanding) enrollment levels at this morons' law school. [I know - I practice in Michigan.]
In other words, it looks to me as if Concord's business model can be properly characterized for two attributes: 1) it does a lot less violence to standards of practice than does the metastasizing enrollment at Thomas Cooley; and 2) it is more economical for students (hence not a consumer fraud) in that it has eschewed arbitraging the tuition-cost of educating spread in favor of offering a year's credit at $9,000( vs. the $35,000 the eager idiots at Thomas Cooley are happy to pay).
Be honest--
One mock trial--a Phi Beta Kappa with a lot of time/coaching without attending law school could win with decent oratory skills.
I am sure an older, mature debater--all things being equal would have an advantage w/older moot court
judges.
It does not prove much--and self-serving generalizations do not advance arguments much.
So Concord is good if you have another profession and need some minimal-level legal competence. I will buy that. But any extrpolation beyond that is futile.
What about the bottom 1/2 at Concord--please enlighten me as to their merits. Seriously there must be a lot of dregs in that class.
Suffice it to say--this example does not prove much.
N is too small--and 1 moot court competion does not a legal legacy create.
85, trust me, Concord provides more than "minimal level legal competence" - given the incredible academic achievements (prior to enrolling at Concord) of many of it's alumni, there is nothing a Concord alum cannot ultimately achieve.
I'm going to start off with what you'd probably figure out reading this posting anyway: I am an online law school student. When applying to law school I took the LSAT (If I recall correctly I got a 171) and applied to, and was accepted to multiple T25 schools, as well as several lower ranked state schools, but for reasons I will lay out below, I chose the online forum.
Go ahead, laugh away and mock all you want; I am completing my online law degree for a specific reason and am very happy with the progress of my education and the choice I made.
Before all you biglaw attorneys get too far into your mocking and belittle me from your pedestal on high, let me go ahead and give you my story, and then you may proceed to mock me freely. I am a financial advisor, and I am a very good financial advisor (by that I mean that I make more money than most biglaw associates, even you bitter fifth and sixth year associates who feel you are too far in to quit and yet too far away from the light at the end of the tunnel to be anything but miserable. In addition, I'd like to point out that I'm able to earn this living working fewer than forty hours a week and I take six to eight weeks of vacation a year). In my years as a financial advisor I have amassed a client base well in excess of 1000 clients, the majority of whom are likely to need trust and estate planning legal work at some time in the future. Currently, every time a client of mine requires legal work (typically 10-15 clients per month) I call on the same trusts and estates attorneys and watch my clients cut a check in exchange for setting up a CRUT, a GRAT, an ILIT or drawing up a will, and this is work that I could do myself if I were allowed to practice law. I have a solid grasp of the issues at hand when it comes to estate planning (In addition to years of experience in the financial industry, I have an MS in Taxation focusing on estate planning and wealth preservation through the use of trusts) and I would gladly take on the extra workload in exchange for the financial rewards it would yield. (note: I'm not naive enough to think that I'll be able to handle all this legal work competently just by completing my JD and passing the bar, which is why I've set up cooperation agreements with the attorneys with whom I currently work. Every time a client of mine needs legal work done, I work with the attorney to understand why a document is being drawn up a certain way and why a certain section is worded a certain way so that I will have the competence when the necessary time comes)
That's the only reason I want an online degree. I have no plans to steal your job at biglaw. I have no misconception that I am receiving a top notch legal education or that I am learning to "think like a lawyer". All I want is the legal right to do some work for my existing clients for which I would be nicely compensated.
That said, I've obviously run into quite a few people who do not know how online law school is different from traditional law school, so here's how it works:
For starters, it's a four year program rather than a three year program (four years is required under CA law) and at the end of the first year all distance education students must pass the First Year Law School Exam (FYLSX), administered by the California Bar association on the topics of Torts, Criminal Law and Contracts. The exam consists of four essay exams and 100 MBE questions, and our professors tell us that the questions we see on the exam are drawn from the same data bank of questions as the questions for the bar exam come from. I don't know if that is true or not, but that's what they tell us (you may judge for yourself, here's a link to the essay questions that were on the exam when I took it: http://www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions/FYX/F0810-Selected-Questions.pdf).
The FYLSX has a rather pathetic pass rate of about 20-25%, but that helps to weed out those who went through a year of worthless legal education and shouldn't be allowed to waste any more money on a legal education because there's no way in hell they're ever going to pass the bar (when I took it the pass rate was less than 15%. Those statistics are available here http://www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions/FYX/FYX0810-Stats.pdf). It was rather depressing to see how many people take the exam multiple times without passing. When I took the exam, if you asked the people seated around me in clockwise fashion how many times they had taken the exam their answers would have been: 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 2nd, 3rd, 1st. (note: I passed the first time, including a perfect 34/34 on contracts questions on the MBE section).
As far as the learning experience, each school is different. Concord uses pre-recorded online legal lectures and the students have three assignments in each 11 day period. Taft University breaks its years down into 48 periods of instruction, with one assignment made over the topic covered during a week, and a four week period for final exams at the end of the year.
That said, what it came down to for me was the decision between spending three years and a ton of time and money at a traditional program that would have impeded on my schedule, or dropping less than $20K for the entire four years to an online school which gave me greater flexibility and the same ability to do what I wanted to do when I finished. An online legal education is not for everyone, but then again, neither is a traditional B&M legal education.
So that's my story, and you may now feel free to laugh away and mock me all you like.
ABA will approve it so as to increase their potential membership base just as they approve most every new law school. Of course, they will throw it on the state bars to regulate admissions and those will be overwhelmed with really smart people who can pass tests. This "profession" is turning into just another job.
Law school was really hard for me because I guess I wasn't really prepared, having attended an inferior undergrad school (UGA) and then attending a prestigious law school (also UGA).
Having said that, I believe those who come to law school from a real profession would have equal footing with those who went to challenging undergrad schools and excelled.
I think most people are seduced into law school by the alleged high paying jobs available in law firms, anecdotes about giant personal injury verdicts and TV shows that highlight the exiting parts of the practice.
But much of practice is hard, time consuming, confusing, and filled with anxiety and drudgery. Online law schools would merely expand the alleged dream to more people and increase the pool of former lawyers who hated the practice.
These law degrees are whatever you can make of them. Jobs you have before law school or prestigious law schools attended merely give you greater access to the dream. You still have to put in the hard work and own it regardless of the school you attended.