Comments on: University of Texas Law Students Warn Employers to Stay Away from UT

By: guest

guest — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:25:32 +0000

Welcome to reality, 117.

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:14:23 +0000

This article will have little or no effect. It’s not unusual for more elite schools to not have a practical curriculum. Texas firms know that UT students are the brightest in the state. If UT really did crank out incompetent lawyers, don’t you think firms would have figured this out by now and would have already stopped hiring them? Some stupid article by ignorant 1Ls is not going to change anything.

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:41:12 +0000

A 3L’s response in the Daily Texan today:
“I take exception to the March 8 guest column, “Law Students Need a Practical Education,” because of the misleading way that the authors characterized their sources. First, the authors misrepresent Professor Harry Edwards’ article. According to the authors, “Edwards charged that this ‘so-called elite’ law school [UT] is primarily dedicated to work that serves ‘no social purpose at all.’” But Edwards’ article put it more broadly: “The law schools should have interdisciplinary scholars, but not scholars whose work serves no social purpose at all.” Notice that “schools” is plural. In fact, nowhere in Edwards’ article does he refer to UT specifically. Thus, Edwards does not, as the authors claim, state that UT is “insufficiently clinical” and suffering from a “lack of good training in legal writing.” Instead, Edwards comments that “[a]nother matter of serious concern in legal education is the lack of good training in legal writing,” and that “[he] agree[s] that law schools are insufficiently clinical.”
But even if Edwards’ statements were directed specifically at UT, the authors failed to mention an important fact: Edwards authored his article 18 years ago. So even if Edwards felt that UT law was insufficiently clinical around the time Bill Clinton first took office, that observation would have little bearing on what the school is today.
Second, the authors misrepresent the increase of applications to UT this year relative to other schools. To be sure, Cornell, one of UT’s peer schools, has experienced a 52-percent increase in applications. But other peer schools have underperformed UT’s 8-percent increase. For instance, the University of Chicago was up only 3.7 percent, Georgetown and Berkeley 4 percent, and UCLA 6 percent. These schools are ranked higher than or tied with UT by U.S. News. It seems that UT will improve in the rankings relative to these schools, all other things constant. The only schools in the top 20 that experienced increases greater than UT were Duke (22 percent), Michigan (20 to 25 percent) and Cornell. So what is to be made of the authors’ claim that UT now risks a “substantial drop in the rankings”? Nothing. Like the authors’ misleading citation to Edwards’ article, their claims regarding the rankings are baseless.
The lack of honesty and precision the authors display in this column embarrasses me.
Although UT does not mandate that students take a brief-writing course, all students take a yearlong course on basic legal research and writing. Either these students did not pay attention in that class, or they decided that making their argument was more important than faithfully and accurately citing their sources. In other words, the authors’ writing displays either dishonesty or laziness — neither of which can be blamed on the law school as an institution. It seems to me that, rather than “institutional indifference,” the true cause of the authors’ angst may be their own indifference. Perhaps if these students took some individual initiative toward enriching their legal education, they would have a fulfilling, enjoyable, intellectually stimulating and yes, practical experience at UT, just as I have.”

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:35:48 +0000

While the wisdom of bashing your own law school is certainly questionable, you also have to consider that if law students stayed perpetually silent about their school’s problems… the school, and it’s reputation/hiring prospects would suffer more in the long run.

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:03:51 +0000

Okay, can any of you SMU/UH/Tech/South Texas students HONESTLY say that your school in ANY way offers a superior education than UT? I mean, I know that justifying failure and all that can be comforting, you can’t ACTUALLY believe that you are in ANY way better off, right? If you really don’t know the answer to that question, try answering this one first: If you had actually gotten into UT, would you have gone?
That’s what I thought. Now shut the fuck up and start working on your memo-writing skills. All the UT grads will be expecting your memos on their desks first thing–for the rest of your lives.

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:56:50 +0000

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 08:38:44 +0000

41-
Why would you think women like large balls? As for hairy nips- WAX. No Pain. No Gain. Epic Fail.

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:16:27 +0000

One….haha..damn..more time..
Thank you 116 “UT is an elite law school” you just made my day.
Ut ..wahahaha..
elite…hahahahaha
law school…ha..wait I can’t breath…hahahaha

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:13:10 +0000

Thank you 116 “UT is an elite law school” you just made my day.
Ut ..wahahaha..
elite…hahahahaha
law school…ha..wait I can’t breath…hahahaha

By: guest

guest — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:53:11 +0000

UT 3L with a US CoA clerkship and BigLaw job here.
I really just don’t understand how 1L’s–whether at Texas or any other school–can feel as though they are qualified to write an article like this. Keep in mind these 1L’s are barely halfway through their first year of law school. They’ve gone through ONE semester, have finished ONE set of exams, and have received exactly four grades in their entire law-school careers (three core classes and LRW). Twelve months ago, some of them were still waiting to hear whether they’d even been admitted to UT. They’ve barely got their training wheels off. What the hell do they know about law school?
As far as the substance of the article, is there effectively any real criticism of UT’s curriculum besides “UT should require brief writing”? The 1L curriculum at UT is entirely prescribed with the same core classes as every other law school: Torts, Crim Law, Con Law, etc. The ONLY freedom in the entire 1L schedule comes in the spring semester, when 1L’s get a single elective. I suppose one could argue that the elective hours should be used for an additional practical-skills course (be it Brief Writing or otherwise), but is one additional course really the difference between success and failure? UT has plenty of “practical” educational opportunities beginning 2L year–14 clinics, several internships, moot court, mock trial, etc. Maybe these 1L’s should have waited until they were at least eligible to participate in those practical extracurriculars before they went on this misguided tirade.
And if the criticism is that UT should restructure its entire educational methodology to be more like Baylor or the other “practical” schools in Texas, well, that just isn’t happening. UT is an elite law school; elite law schools have theoretical curricula. Period. Not a single school in the T14 has a predominately “practical” curriculum. Lesser-ranked law schools use such curricula because it’s the only way their students will ever get jobs. Top law schools can rely on employers’ knowing that their students are the best and brightest. UT’s no HYS, but it’s a top school. It has no business adopting the more “practical” model of the inferior in-state schools.