Law School Discussion

Law Students => Online Law Schools => Topic started by: planejane on January 27, 2004, 07:19:35 PM

Title: Concord Law School
Post by: planejane on January 27, 2004, 07:19:35 PM
Any comments about Concord Law School?

Christie
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: lawschoolafterdark on January 28, 2004, 08:01:24 AM
If you believe the press, Concord got off to a good start with the first class to sit for the bar. I checked lawschool.com for the latest numbers. First try 25% pass rate, overall 20%. $7000 per year seems high for a distance school.  That said, they stack up well on pass rate vs. other distance schools.  I think Taft had about a 15% pass rate.  The other schools were not as high.

visit www.lawschoolafterdark.com
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: lawschoolafterdark on January 28, 2004, 03:26:16 PM
As you may know, California is the only bar Concord grads are eligible to sit for at this time.  That is a down side if you are not a California person. 

GW
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: planejane on February 25, 2004, 01:24:03 PM
Concord Update!!!

Concord Law School now requires a bachelor's degree for admissions.

FYI.

Christie
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: annr on August 20, 2004, 06:36:27 PM
The folks at Concord were much more interested in when they'd be receiving my tuition check than anything else about me or my plans. When I expressed my misgivings about the high tuition, they actually suggested I take an equity loan out on my home to pay for it, and then called and emailed me relentlessly when I declined. Needless to say, I went with a different school.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: planejane on August 22, 2004, 07:37:07 PM
The downfall to Concord is practicing in CA for 5 years or so until you could get back home to practice.  I am all for online degrees.  I am working on #3 right now!!!

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Tortilicious on August 26, 2004, 03:15:26 PM
I've taken many undergrad online courses. I've enjoyed them all at made all A's. While it is true that the isolation does not benefit everyone and time management is essential, I usually found online classes to be more demanding than traditional classes. On WebCT and Blackboard, you have to post your assignment answers for the entire class to read, and you are required to read theirs as well. In an in-person class(especially the larger ones) it is rather easy to hide amongst your classmates and remain anonymous. Anyone who thinks an online law school is easier than a traditional one is merely misinformed.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Rebecca on August 28, 2004, 09:12:32 PM
Hi Everyone;

I did alot of research on Concord, pre-B.A degree requirement days, and the one thing that kept me from moving forward (aside from the harrasing e-mails and calls when I declined), was that an online law school won't teach me how to argue.  Being in a live classroom, teaches how to orally practice law, not just to know and be able to learn law.  This difference is critical, and certainly not worth borrowing $7,000/yr for.

Regards,
Rebecca





Any comments about Concord Law School?

Christie
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: highball on August 29, 2004, 01:18:33 PM
Man, I wish I could like just watch video of my classes and not go.  Like, TIVO all that sh*t so I can fast forward through all the BS questions from 1/2 the class.  Like, as soon as that annoying, I wanna work on Capitol Hill chick 2 rows up from me in Criminal raises her hand I could hit the button and [Tivo sound]Bloop![/Tivo] she'd be gone.  Hell yes...
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DaveMo on September 11, 2004, 06:26:51 PM
So does anyone go there? Can they comment on their experience with Concord or other online law school (Abrham Lincoln, NWCU)
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: zemog on September 16, 2004, 08:27:08 AM
I do not attend an online law school but my first take on it would be that if you were trying to get into a law firm, i'm not sure how you would fare.  Not that you would not get as good as an education, but there's a certain stigma that comes with an online degree whether is undergrad or law school.

If you are just trying to enhance your own knowledge to help your business or advance in your current employment, I think that would make sense, but other than that, I think it's too risky of a move.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Prolodoc on September 17, 2004, 02:06:19 PM
There are several states that will allow you to sit for the bar after receiving your JD through a DL school if you have an LLM from an ABA school.  That is the route I plan to take.  I will probably begin Concord in January after practicing nurse anesthesia for 28 years.  I have looked at all of the DL schools and still feel that the online experience with Concord will be the best.  Any opinions out there?  Later, Prolodoc
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: planejane on September 23, 2004, 12:29:06 PM
I have a question for you then.  How will you get a LLM from an ABA-approved school if Concord is non-ABA approved?

Just wondering and asking.  Also, if you have researched this issue, which ABA-approved schools will accept Concord, for example, for the LLM degree.

I am still exploring my options, as I complete my bachelor's degree in five months.

Thanks and good luck!
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: lawschoolstudent99 on November 30, 2004, 11:16:34 AM
Concord Law School is an excellent place of higher learning. That being said, there are some issues that need to be clarified.

1. Do IVY League schools "look down" on Concord?
Answer: Yes. They also look down on all state universities that are not rated in the top tier. You do yourself a disservice if you chose your school based on how students at IVY league schools will perceive you.

2. What are Concord's Bar passage rates?
Answer: Concord is a new institution. It was founded in 1998. Only two classes have sat for the California Bar. Six out of the ten students passed the first time out of the original class. Six out of fourteen passed on the first try from the second class. To date: 12 out of 24 have passed the California Bar exam on their first try.

3. How does this compare with other schools?
Answer: Pretty well. On the last Cal Bar exam, 3 of 5 Stanford students passed the exam. Only 38% of USC law school grads passed the same exam. UCLA was the only California school that posted an exceptional pass rate on the Cal Bar at 79%. Cooley, an ABA school in Michigan ,recorded a 0 out of 22 on the same test; no Cooley grad passed the Cal Bar. What does that say about Concord? They are doing pretty well at this point. The Cal Bar seems to be a particularly tough exam.

4. How selective is admittance to Concord?
Concord is not at all selective. Almost anyone can go there. HOWEVER! Beware. There is one large caveat. The State of California requires that all students from non-ABA approved schools must pass the FYLSX (First Year Law Exam) before they can receive credit for their second year of legal studies. The FYLSX is very difficult; many students from ABA schools could not pass it. So Concord's upper level students are a select group.

5. How does the FYLSX compare to the LSAT?
Answer: It does not at all. The FYLSX is far more difficult. Moreover, the FYLSX tests students on their first year of legal studies. The LSAT is a multiple guess test on logic problems. All in all, it is easier to make it at an ABA school if you are only an average law student. BTW -- tier 4 ABA schools are not very hard to get into; getting a 148 on the LSAT is a lot easier then passing the FYLSX!

6. Is Concord inexpensive?
Answer: yes and no. If you score in the 160's on the LSAT, you can attend most tier 4 law schools free of charge. Concord does not offer financial aid. So a tier 4 ABA school may cost less if you do reasonably well on your LSATs. However, Concord, despite its lack of ABA accreditation, may be better than many tier 4 ABA schools, so be careful. (Keep in mind that Concord only lacks ABA accreditation because it is an Internet school. Concord is well-regarded academically.) Ultimately, you want the best education for the money. It is what you *learn* that will determine your future.

7. Describe the prototypical Concord student:
Answer: Very smart and very motivated. Concord's academic standards, from the first year on, are dictated by the California Bar. Students only have three times to pass the FYLSX. If they fail three times, they cannot finish their legal studies. Thus, Concord's standards are, by necessity, harder than those of many schools -- particularly in the early stages.

8. Can I become a practicing lawyer with a Concord degree?
Answer: Absolutely. You are initially limited to taking the Cal Bar; however, most states will allow you to take their state bars after you have practiced a year or so in California.

9. Can I make a living with my Concord degree?
Answer: A Concord degree is not the equivalent of a degree from Harvard, Yale, Michigan, Stanford, NYU, or Chicago. You should be aware that most law schools have regional reputations; a degree from Detroit's excellent Wayne State University Law School is golden in the Detroit area, because many judges and attorneys in Detroit studied there. On the other hand, in California, a WSU degree is meaningless. As more and more Concord students pass the bar, these individuals will undoubtably begin law firms. As their firms are successful, Concord's reputation will spread and they will in turn hire more Concord graduates. This is the way all law schools (except those on the elite list) operate. Concord is new. There are only a handful of graduates. In the 1600's how many Law School graduates were there from the Harvard Divinity School? Were they respected by the elite institutions of Europe? Of course not! Judging the success of Concord's alumni in building solid relationships with the community at large is premature at this point. However, to date Concord has a fine record. Undoubtably they will succeed.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: chaser on December 20, 2004, 07:18:00 PM
Aren't they a little "pricey" for DL?

That stated, I think they are required to divulge their "1st time pass"-rate on the Baby Bar.  In my opinion, if that's over 20%, they are a pretty good school.

Before making the commitment, you might want to look at past Baby Bars yourself, at: http://www.legaled.com/babybar.htm

That should shatter any illusions that the first year at a California Distance Learning school is going to be some kind of picnic...
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: guiltyascharged on January 04, 2005, 10:00:14 PM
I'm a Concord student, at least 'till the end of week when my transfer out is final.  I completed part of the 4-year program and decided it's time to move on.  Reason: value. 

The ten or so correspondence schools in CA seem to operate with the same formula which is based on two essentials: a) provide 864 hours of instruction within a 48-52 week period, b) provide a 4-year degree granting curriculum.  Anything beyond that is pure marketing, designed to attract and retain clients.  Concord's edge is its association with Kaplan, a very big name in the distance learning industry.  That seems to provide its program the illusion of quality, something many of the others struggle to achieve.  Does it make Concord a better school than the rest?  Opinion reserved. 

For the most part these correspondence "schools" are basically expensive prolonged bar prep courses, in essence not substantially different than commercial short courses.  To me there is no doubt that some people could learn enough in other ways, in less time at far less cost to pass the Bar, but CalBar has made attendance at one of these businesses almost mandatory. In my opinion they do this to protect their reputation, such as it is. Imagine the fallout if the Bar started being passed by the unwashed masses with nothing but an undergraduate degree and a cheap Bar Review course under their belt. Outrageous! .....and potentially bad for the business of distance law education which not surprisingly is by and large run by California attorneys.  What a coincidence.

My personal experience has convinced me that those enrolled essentially teach themselves.  The "school" does very little beyond the bare business basics to help it's clients prepare for the Bar.  After paying what in many cases is an exhorbitant tuition you do nothing more than read the texts, do the limited assignments and pass some open book quizzes.  Even Concord's final exams are technically open book since they merely depend on students' compliance with their Honor Code to not use notes. Yeah, right, like that really happens when no one's looking.  NWCALaw at least requires its finals to be proctored, which is to its credit.  Day to day in these schools there is virtually none or very limited intellectual interaction with teaching staff.  Concord, however, does provide email access to professors and does provide interactive chat sessions.  Hardly ground-breaking 21st century technology.  Grading is another interesting and frustrating experience.  First, its slow.  Finals from early December are still not graded. That has not stopped the administration from advancing students to 2L even though their PR clearly indicates advancement is predicated on successful completion of all prior year requirements and achieving a passing grade.  Hmmm, could it be the lure of that $7800 which can be transferred immediately to their account, only later to be returned in cases of academic failure?  Business first, academics second.

Those considering the correspondence school route should understand there is no substitute for real, live one-on-one discussion with a professional, and by and large these businesses do not provide that, depite the marketing hype. The hidden costs should also be carefully considered. The texts required by the programs are generally not adequate to provide a student with a clear understanding of the law.  Most of the folks I've talked to purchase various 3rd party study aids which are not particularly expensive, until you realize you need to do this for all four years. It will add considerably to the cost of the degree.  So what does Concord provide that justifies $7800 a year?  It's a matter of opinion, but if you are one of those people who needs someone constantly checking on your progress and reminding you to keep moving then maybe it's the place for you.  If you are self-motivated, which I would hope most correspondence school students are, then there are much cheaper solutions. 

Concord makes a very big point of touting its high tech methodology.  While adequate, it is by no stretch of the imagination particularly high tech.  Each student is provided a home page from which they can access school resources.  Included is a progress chart that tracks accomplishments as you chunk throught the various modules of instruction.  If you get too far behind they change color to warn you.  If you attempt to go too fast the system will stop you by proventing access to the assignments which consist of readings, online videos, essay writing and quizzes.  Attendance at the periodic live chats is optional.  The videos run inside RealPlayer which some people would just as soon not have installed on their machines because of its annoying tendency to hook into other functions.  Access to the system is restricted through the use of a Verisign digital certificate, which you must purchase each year.  Only about $15 bucks just another little nickle-dime annoyance.

For the most part I believe that Concord provides as good a learning experience as you will find among the various correspondence schools.  In my opinion, it could be better.  There is also a fairly robust student community which is accessible through various Yahoo groups where just about anything is discussed.  Unfortunately, lawyerly analysis of issues is not high on the agenda of most of these groups, but rather an uncomfortable amount of opinionated dialogue on various current affairs.  Something you could find on any number of open Usenet boards.  But the students are enthusiastic and, for the most part, supportive.  They are also notably well-educated.  You will find yourself in and amongst a fair number of post-graduate educated individuals.  They seem to develop true friendships despite the virtual connection.  One particularly noteworthy board is that moderated by Dr. Wm. Weston called Res Ipsa Loquitor.  Here he restricts discussion to the analysis of specific legal dilemmas.  He participates openly and provides valuable feedback to posters on their legal theories.  A real gem of a resource but it's something he does on his own, not something sponsored by Concord, as far as I can tell.  I will miss that board.  There is also a student bar association which I believe is fairly unique among correspondence schools.  Its value to students is questionable but it does provide an outlet for the joiners to play-act as budding lawyers.  There is no law review or moot court.  Pay the big bucks and attend a traditional school for these.

In summation, it is my opinion these "schools" are primarily businesses and academic institutions second.  Some provide the bare minimum to satisfy the Cal Bar requirements and some others throw in a bell or whistle to make them distinguishable from the crowd.  From what I see, students should be forewarned they will be largely responsible for teaching themselves the law and that mere attendance is probably not going to be enough to pass the Bar.

Having said that, I'm transferring to Northwestern California Law School.  It meets the test I described above at a much lower price point then most of the others.  It boils down to value, how much you get for your money.  Whether or not this is a good decision, time will tell.

Hope this helps.   ;D

The information here is my opinion only.  It is not intended to interfer with any business relationships or compromise the conduct of business.  It is provided with the intent to facilitate reaching an informed purchasing decision.  Any inaccuracies in the information are unintentional and will be corrected immediately upon notification by a recognized authority.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 06, 2005, 10:57:39 AM
guiltyascharged--

Are you concerned at all about national accreditation? As I understand it, the 50 states do not have to recognize an unaccredited degree as legal.  Oregon, for example, has a list of schools from which degrees claimed are illegal.  The schools are not recognized by the CHEA or US Dept of Education.  In order for a school to grant degrees legally in the states that care about this, the school must be at least accredited by the DETC, which is on the list of US Dept of Education approved accreditation agencies. 

The only two distance learning law schools that qualify are Taft and Concord.  I have chosen Taft, because as you say, I find that I will be teaching myself for the most part, and I want to have more funds to put toward self-study aids.

I appreciate your post.  It is the most honest, straight-forward assessment of Concord and distance learning law as I have read in my two months long research on the subject.  For one thing, students of these schools have a desire to legitimize their choice, and for another, if they are not self-directed or suited for distance learning, their experience is tainted...

...anyway, I find that I learn better alone.  I do not know why, although I have tried to understand.  I suppose it is because I get bored sitting in classes, or find the line of BS teachers toss out while they try to be entertaining, distracting.  Or maybe I have a learning disability that requires the focus of distance learning.  Whatever the reason, I'm going to claim that my DL JD is the reward for being a rebel and non-conformist.

Best of luck to you...

sharkfish
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: chaser on January 06, 2005, 04:10:55 PM
The latest stats I can find show Concord with a first-time pass rate on the Baby Bar of 35.1%.

Res ipsa loquitur...
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 06, 2005, 04:27:01 PM
I wonder what Baby Bar reviews the Concord students use...

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: guiltyascharged on January 06, 2005, 11:43:56 PM
Sharkfish -
Response to a couple of your questions.  First re. accredidation.  It has crossed my mind but it's not a show-stopper.  I rationalize that these schools are so far down the food chain within the legal education hierarchy that quasi-accreditation is meaningless for my purposes.  My reason for going through this ordeal is primarily self-improvement and business credentials.  I'm in it primarily for the knowledge which I can use to my advantage without being licensed. So, why not just study on my own without the expense of a school?  Because I'm not THAT motivated.  I need someone poking at me occasionally to keep up the pace.  But not $7800 worth of friendly reminders, $2850 will do just fine.  If I'm so lucky as to become licensed in CA I will practice there as a virtual law office, putting in the required time to qualify to sit for the Bar in my home state.  If I don't make it, oh well.

The Concord students for the most part do not use a Baby Bar prep course.  The school offers a pre-test weekend with Professor Bracci who provides that last minute dose of review together with pep talk.  They also provide all 1L sudents with the Practising Law Institute's Multistate Bar Review comprehensive outlines, sample MCQ and essays on CD's.   You also have access to the material at the PLI website. This is a particularly useful resource because the outlines are pretty much spot-on, simple and logical.  If you have a chance to acquire them I recommend you do so. 

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Prolodoc on January 07, 2005, 11:24:11 AM
Please expand on the virtual office concept.  That is new to me.  Can you actually use that to count toward the 5 years needed to apply in other states>  Thanks, Prolodoc
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: guiltyascharged on January 08, 2005, 04:23:33 PM
Virtual office: one that exists in form, not substance.  Register your company in CA, establish a place of business (if needed) through one of many agents for hire and conduct biz via the internet, telephone, mail.  Required court appearance can be contracted out to any of the numerous attorneys for hire.  Sure, it cuts into the profit but the idea is to accrue the time needed to qualify in another state. And the rules don't stipulate the business has to be successful. One will, probate or clean divorce each year should be all that's needed to demonstrate an active practice.  Will it work?  I'll let you know in a few years.   ;)
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: chaser on January 10, 2005, 03:45:23 PM
St. Thomas University in Miami is very receptive to DL J.D. applicants for LL.M., and is ABA approved.

After that, I would just apply to any ABA school that offers LLM; which is in an area geographically you want to practice.  What subjects they offer the LL.M IN is also a factor.  Like, for instance, the University of Arizona offers one in "Indigenous Peoples Rights."  You are either highly interested in that subject...or you are not. 

Some offer "general" LL.M.'s.  Needless to say, you've got to think of a topic you want to write a 150 page thesis on, citing 50 references (or whatever the requirements are.)  Here's a topic: "Should DL be legal in this state?"  Then conclude, "Yes."  Get published, and send it to a state legislator, and some influential people on the bar commitee of the state!

The worst-case scenario is that they turn you down and you lose the time and nominal money for the application fee. 

(Okay...maybe somebody somewhere will insult you.  But if you can't recover from that, you shouldn't be a lawyer anyway [debatably].)

(If you passed the California bar, I'll bet you are more qualified to practice law than many of the other LL.M. students currently in  the school.)
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 10, 2005, 03:57:45 PM
1. Do IVY League schools "look down" on Concord?
Answer: Yes. They also look down on all state universities that are not rated in the top tier. You do yourself a disservice if you chose your school based on how students at IVY league schools will perceive you.

Ivy schools are not the only ones who look down on Concord. Most Ivy students have not heard of Concord. Even TTT students look down on Concord as well as every other "distance learning" thing. Sorry, but that's the truth. HTH
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 10, 2005, 04:23:44 PM
1. Do IVY League schools "look down" on Concord?
Answer: Yes. They also look down on all state universities that are not rated in the top tier. You do yourself a disservice if you chose your school based on how students at IVY league schools will perceive you.

Ivy schools are not the only ones who look down on Concord. Most Ivy students have not heard of Concord. Even TTT students look down on Concord as well as every other "distance learning" thing. Sorry, but that's the truth. HTH


If we cared what Ivy students or anyone else thought we'd all be buying the most expensive car, house, and wearing designer clothes, too.  But nobody is that stupid to care, and if they do, it is because they are afraid their secret will be exposed:  practicing law simply isn't that hard.  The bar is the great equalizer.  If you should not have been in law school, you won't pass the bar, and you will have wasted time trying.  However, that time I decide to waste is my decision, not some elitist bunch of snobs who have paid the ABA fees to join the "brotherhood" of the exclusive.

I've taken your bait...but I won't be arguing with you anymore over this.  Your opinion is  your opinion.

If you were so smart, you would have figured out a way to go to law school for free...but I bet you are in debt up to your neck...so who is really the fool?



Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 10, 2005, 04:30:37 PM
Mr. Downy

http://www.jdjive.com/read.php?1,36265,36284#msg-36284

"I worked for the court for a while and 3 times I saw "correspondence schools takers" kick the ass of one Boalt Hall lawyers practicing for almost 10 years, one Golden Gate lawyer practicing for almost 3 years and one other lawschool I can't remember except it was ABA."


Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 10, 2005, 05:11:13 PM
1. Do IVY League schools "look down" on Concord?
Answer: Yes. They also look down on all state universities that are not rated in the top tier. You do yourself a disservice if you chose your school based on how students at IVY league schools will perceive you.

Ivy schools are not the only ones who look down on Concord. Most Ivy students have not heard of Concord. Even TTT students look down on Concord as well as every other "distance learning" thing. Sorry, but that's the truth. HTH


If we cared what Ivy students or anyone else thought we'd all be buying the most expensive car, house, and wearing designer clothes, too.  But nobody is that stupid to care, and if they do, it is because they are afraid their secret will be exposed:  practicing law simply isn't that hard.  The bar is the great equalizer.  If you should not have been in law school, you won't pass the bar, and you will have wasted time trying.  However, that time I decide to waste is my decision, not some elitist bunch of snobs who have paid the ABA fees to join the "brotherhood" of the exclusive.

I've taken your bait...but I won't be arguing with you anymore over this.  Your opinion is  your opinion.

If you were so smart, you would have figured out a way to go to law school for free...but I bet you are in debt up to your neck...so who is really the fool?

Wow, I post something that is undeniably true in the appropriate forum without being insulting to anyone and I still get flamed.

Now, to address your concerns:

1. Good job attacking the "elitist snobs" of the ABA. I can see that you are good at making coherent arguments without resorting to unfounded and ridiculous generalizations about thousands of people. Also, can you explain how this is at all relevant to the my statement that Concord is looked down on? Also, can you please provide a coherent reason why my statement is not true?

2.In terms of me being a "fool" up to my neck in debt- three responses come to mind. First, I am not up to my neck in debt and attend a lower top twenty because of a decent scholarship. Second, my parents pay for everything so I won't have any debt regardless  ;D. Finally, I will make more money than you when we both graduate, which nullifies any effect of debt (assuming I had any).

Finally, one example of hearsay whereby someone says Concord is good does not mitigate my argument that in general, even if it is good, people look down on it. If you can't handle that don't go there.

Thanks, HTH and pwn3d!
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 10, 2005, 10:42:19 PM
"Second, my parents pay for everything so I won't have any debt regardless "

That explains it all. 


Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 10, 2005, 11:19:14 PM
"Second, my parents pay for everything so I won't have any debt regardless "

That explains it all. 

Jealous much?
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Prolodoc on January 11, 2005, 09:47:04 AM
Any education is the product of what one puts into it.  DL learing is not for everyone. It is mostly for the self starters who do not need a push every once in awhile. I was educated in one of the top residencies in the nation and knew of great students and poor ones who came from this program.  There is no magic formula in learning the law.  Just hard work and study.  You get back what you put into it.  JMHO.  Later, Prolodoc
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 11:39:45 AM
It would seem that some people need validation of the choice of law school.  Trashing other schools helps.  Don't pay any attention.  it's just a symptom of downy syndrome.

Any education is the product of what one puts into it.  DL learing is not for everyone. It is mostly for the self starters who do not need a push every once in awhile. I was educated in one of the top residencies in the nation and knew of great students and poor ones who came from this program.  There is no magic formula in learning the law.  Just hard work and study.  You get back what you put into it.  JMHO.  Later, Prolodoc

I didn't trash his school. I said the reality is that people look down on distance education. He then flamed me.

I looked at his blog- he actually has a link on there with part of an article that says "some firms will not hire ABA grads." This person is clearly jaded and has no idea what the legal profession is about.

Jeffjoe, thank you for your ridiculous response. Please, tell me all the virtues of attending non-accredited online law schools. I'm sure I can learn the "errors" of my ways.

D
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 12:27:44 PM
Did I say you trashed him?  That would be ridiculous after an undeniable posting.

I see you are honing in on my use of the term "undeniable," so I will defend it.

It is undeniable that accredited, brick and mortar law school students in general (to allow for exceptions that don't break the general trend) look down on distance learning. Law firms, in general, do this as well. Maybe you can prove me wrong and demonstrate that these statements are not, in fact, undeniable. I don't think you can.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 12:50:24 PM
Can there be an undeniable opinion?  Sounds like downy syndrome to me.

Did I say you trashed him?  That would be ridiculous after an undeniable posting.

I see you are honing in on my use of the term "undeniable," so I will defend it.

It is undeniable that accredited, brick and mortar law school students in general (to allow for exceptions that don't break the general trend) look down on distance learning. Law firms, in general, do this as well. Maybe you can prove me wrong and demonstrate that these statements are not, in fact, undeniable. I don't think you can.


My point was not that the opinion itself is undeniable (hence my claim two posts above that even if Concord is a good school, people will still look down on it). My claim is that it is undeniable that there is a widespread low opinion of unaccredited and DL schools.

In any group of different entities there will be a hierarchy. If you refuse to accept that Concord and DL may not be at the top of the pile, that's your problem.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 01:03:07 PM
Sure, but Concord/DL will face this distaste much more often than ABA schools.

I don't care if people want to go to Concord, but to female dog about what a great school it is sounds ridiculous.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 01:20:17 PM


I didn't trash his school. I said the reality is that people look down on distance education. He then flamed me.

I looked at his blog- he actually has a link on there with part of an article that says "some firms will not hire ABA grads." This person is clearly jaded and has no idea what the legal profession is about.



That was a quote posted verbatim, not my opinion.  I inserted a possible correction of what the quotee probably meant to say.  The quotee could very well have meant that some ABA lawyers don't cut the mustard in the working world:  everyone knows of ABA lawyers who never break into the field.

As far as "flaming" you:  how thin-skinned you are!  I only pointed out the fact that you are a child still depending on his/her parents and so your opinion must be considered in that context.  Those of us who do not have a trust fund or substantial financial means are going to be more likely to consider options.  Those of us who have goo-gobs of money to spend on an iffy profession are certainly going to make elitist statements.

I don't care what YOU think so much as I care that others may not consider all their options because someone on a forum who is in a completely different situation has a view that **may/may not** be based in reality.

I went to an elite near-Ivy school in the midwest for my undergraduate education and the elitism was simply not warranted.  There are mediocre graduates and stellar graduates, same as any school.

The time will come when everyone truly has access to good education;  that time has not come yet because the "elites" are too busy trying to preserve their position.  If I pass the bar, I am no less qualified than any other newly graduated lawyer, no matter what school they went to.

Elite schools exact their toll, requiring the kind of "payback" for joining the club that ruins lives if you allow it. 

This is a great article with an attached pdf on the subject and everyone should read it for a dose of reality about the legal profession:

http://www.dljd.net/2005/01/why-big-law-isnt-in-my-range.html

And here is one on exactly what the ABA requires of its members:

http://www.dljd.net/2005/01/aba-monopoly-exposed.html





Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: dgatl on January 11, 2005, 03:02:34 PM
Sharkfish:

I took an opportunity to read the second link (and the report attached to the second link).

In your link, you laugh at why, in this information technology age, the ABA requires law schools to keep vast libraries.

Hmmm...  I don't know.  I wonder why I see so many practicing attorneys in the law library at my law school.  I wonder why, during my job interview last week, I saw an attorney consulting a reporter.

Maybe it's because Lexis and Westlaw are VERY EXPENSIVE such that 1) small firms can't afford it or 2) a growing number of clients (of even big law firms) refuse to be billed for it.  Additionally, as someone that was forced to "use the books" last semester for legal writing, I appreciate the ability to use a reporter (or multiple reporters) simultaneously to construct the correct rule of law applicable, and perform the necessary comparisons.  Many legal sources may not be available electronically, but are available in print.  I doubt that your future legal career (if you have one) will not involve you using the books.

2:  You say that ABA-control is "Un-Constitutional".  This is ridiculous.  Every profession, including doctors, CPAs, dentists, have some kind of a licensing board.  If a state supreme court chooses to recognize a school not approved by the ABA, that is their choice (bc typically the non-ABA school gears its instruction to the state law).  However, the ABA sets a general guideline so that the Supreme Court of Washington doesn't have to worry whether a University of Miami graduate is capable of practicing law in Washington state.  Your "Un-constitutional" comment adds a nice bit of drama to your blog, but is pretty asinine.

3:  The linked report on ABA was created by a distance law student for his professor.  Enough said.  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

OWNED
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 04:03:06 PM
How is it unlawful? The ABA is not obligated to accredit any law school. Accreditation is reserved for schools that meet ABA guidelines of sufficiency and competence. If a school like Cooley can meet ABA requirements, it cannot be that hard.

Also, isn't any necessary regulatory agency a "monopoly" in the sense that it is unitary? The alternative would be an even greater deluge of bad law schools and crappy lawyers.

If anything, the ABA should reduce the amount of schools that are accredited. There are already too many TTTs that do a disservice to their students and to the profession.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: dgatl on January 11, 2005, 04:36:33 PM
i think all accreditation agencies should be destroyed.  i would prefer to have my highways and bridges engineered by students of questionable qualifications, and get heart surgery done by a doctor who got an online MD degree.  oh, and if a friend is falsely arrested and charged with capital murder, I think anyone with a JD, even if there is a proliferation of online JD colleges that grant credit for life experiences and the attorney of question received his JD from there, should be allowed to help keep my friend off death row.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 04:47:49 PM
I'm still laughing.  I have access to Lexis/Nexis.  I don't need a brick and mortar library that I can tell. 

So you pay those tens of thousands in tuition for a library?  For professors that are not allowed to make money to support themselves?



Do any distance learning students here feel they need a physical library? 


You don't answer any of the issues regarding why the ABA requires 8 hours max teaching time by professors, and minimum of six full time professors.

I hope you do better in forming argument as a lawyer.  Calling me asinine does not an argument make.  Also, I've noticed that the weakest debaters always point to the credibility of the author, rather than the statements therein.



There's no question that ABA has ensured a decent legal education for ABA school students.  The question I have is the ABA protecting a fiefdom, or are they helping MORE people get a better education?  My argument is that the ABA places trivial limitations.

I could hardly argue with the ABA if they set reasonable standards.   They are way behind the times.  Kind of like the lawyers I know who can't and won't grasp technological advancements. 


Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 04:53:01 PM
Libraries that don't involve logging into Yahoo are nice, yes, but that is not the reason people attend ABA schools. ABA schools are attractive to law firms, and online law schools are not. That is the simple answer- please feel free to make sarcastic and ridiculous claims against this obvious truth.

Also, I don't know anything about Concord's legal writing program (assuming of course that one exists) but you may want to learn how to use proper grammar and spelling. The Career Services Office at my ABA school says that employers like these skills.

HTH
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 05:24:41 PM
Enjoy your parent's money.  You are going to need it.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Coregram on January 11, 2005, 06:08:00 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                          AT
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 1995                             (202) 616-2771
                                               TDD (202) 514-1888

 JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION RESOLVE CHARGES
  THAT THE ABA'S PROCESS FOR ACCREDITING LAW SCHOOLS WAS MISUSED
                                 

     WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Justice and the
American Bar Association today resolved charges that the ABA
process for accrediting law schools had been misused to inflate
faculty salaries and benefits.
     The Antitrust Division filed a civil lawsuit and settlement
in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging that the ABA
used its power as the law school accrediting agency to protect
law faculties' economic interests and working conditions.
      Anne K. Bingaman, Assistant Attorney General in charge of
the Antitrust Division, said, "The ABA's accreditation process
required that universities raise salaries to artificially-inflated levels,
and meet other costly accreditation requirements
that had little to do with the quality of the legal education
they provided.  The settlement reached today stops this
anticompetitive conduct."
     Under today's proposed settlement, the ABA would be
prohibited from:
     * Fixing faculty salaries;
     * Refusing to accredit schools simply because they are
for-profit; and
     * Refusing to allow ABA-approved law schools to accept
credits for classes at schools that are state-accredited but not
ABA-approved. 
     The settlement also:
     *  Establishes a special committee to determine if ABA
accreditation requirements in six other areas should be revised--
student to faculty ratios, teaching loads, sabbaticals, bar
preparation courses, facilities, and other resources.
     *  Opens up the ABA accreditation process so that it is no
longer controlled by legal faculty who benefit from requiring
better pay and working conditions.
     "The powerful status of the ABA does not insulate it from
the antitrust laws," said Bingaman.  "The Antitrust Division has
sued many professional trade associations, which, like the ABA,
have violated the antitrust laws.  Lawyers must keep their own
house in order as well."
     The complaint charges that the ABA's accreditation process
had the effect of pressuring law schools to raise salaries to the
national or regional median.  The Department said by pressuring
schools to pay the median salary, the ABA kept raising the target
that schools had to meet.
     About 90 percent of the ABA's Section of Legal Education
members are law faculty.  The section is responsible for the law
school accreditation program, which has operated without adequate
oversight.  The complaint alleges that the lack of oversight has
led to abuses in the accreditation process, leading to an undue
focus on guild concerns rather than quality education.
     Through the process established by the consent decree, the
ABA will work in the months ahead to revise its accreditation
standards to address the problems identified in the government's
complaint.  Bingaman said, "We are pleased that the ABA has acted
promptly and responsibly to address these issues, so that its
important role in accrediting the nation's law schools can be
performed appropriately and effectively."
     The ABA, which is headquartered in Chicago, is the world's
largest professional association for lawyers.  There are
currently 177 ABA-approved law schools.
     To become effective, the consent decree must be approved by
the court following a 60-day comment period as required by the
Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act.  If the consent decree is
approved by the court, it will settle the suit.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 07:33:23 PM
"you still PNW3D"

I'm sure your law professors use this language...I don't even know what that means.

uh hunh.  I'm arguing with a teenager who has a life experience of....nil. 

Bye.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 07:56:40 PM
"you still PNW3D"

I'm sure your law professors use this language...I don't even know what that means.

uh hunh.  I'm arguing with a teenager who has a life experience of....nil. 

Bye.



1. The claim that 'law professors don't use that language' is almost as bad as the ones you made against ABA schools. What people type on a message board does not correlate to the language they use in law school. You were pwn3d, and you are a TTT. I'll try really hard not to include those terms in my next memo.

2. Even assuming your 'no life experience' ad hom was true, it doesn't answer the fact that dgatl and DOWNY will have better jobs than you and will be making more money, regardless of what TTT experiences you think you have.

HTH
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 08:12:52 PM
Hey, let's all be friends and watch Law and Order together...

But seriously...I am very biased so my statements will reflect that.

I like jeffjoe's approach:  live and let live.  I enjoy a good debate, so I may have gone to far.

Please accept my apologies for being insensitive and over-zealous.

Cheers.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on January 11, 2005, 08:14:22 PM
Mr. Downy

http://www.jdjive.com/read.php?1,36265,36284#msg-36284

"I worked for the court for a while and 3 times I saw "correspondence schools takers" kick the ass of one Boalt Hall lawyers practicing for almost 10 years, one Golden Gate lawyer practicing for almost 3 years and one other lawschool I can't remember except it was ABA."




Your exceptionally valid evidence has opened my eyes!  What was I thinking going to Boalt?!  What a TTT!  I shall immediately gather the necessary materials and transfer into a distance learning program, thereby significantly increasing my chances of placement at Skadden, MoFo, and Wachtell.

I have been decieved!  We have ALL been decieved!  Save yourselves from your ABA-accredited degrees while you still can, especially those of you who go to Yale -- you need all the help you can get!
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 08:21:38 PM
Congratulations on missing the point entirely.

1.  Go to ABA if you can afford the tuition/qualify for financial aid/have the spare time
2.  If you can't go ABA go non-ABA brick and mortar
3.  If neither 1 & 2 are possible, distance learning JDs are a valid OPTION, as evidenced by the many successful DL lawyers as presented on my blog


I'm too old and crotchety to argue with twenty-somethings, dammit!

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 08:32:59 PM
I'm too old and crotchety to argue with twenty-somethings, dammit!

It didn't seem to stop you before.

Although, I am glad you apologized in your previous post, because your TTTness was really starting to get on my nerves.

Finally, two pieces of advice:
1. Don't act like a religious fanatic or an escaped Taliban commando the next time you advocate DL- it will only make you look crazy, and will hurt your credibility.

2. You had better get used to us 20-somethings, because we have a large role in the legal profession and you will have to deal with us when you graduate.

HTH
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 11, 2005, 08:46:52 PM
"1. Don't act like a religious fanatic or an escaped Taliban commando the next time you advocate DL- it will only make you look crazy, and will hurt your credibility."


Still advocating DL, still feeling good about it.  See my previous post in this thread.  Actually reading the post before you respond will save you embarassment in the future.

Buh-bye.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 09:09:20 PM
"1. Don't act like a religious fanatic or an escaped Taliban commando the next time you advocate DL- it will only make you look crazy, and will hurt your credibility."


Still advocating DL, still feeling good about it.  See my previous post in this thread.  Actually reading the post before you respond will save you embarassment in the future.

Buh-bye.

Your post is not at all responsive to anything I have said. I did not take issue with your support of DL, only with your methods of doing so. The fact that your last post could have been written by a reasonable individual does not negate the raving madness of your other posts, as well as your blog.

Second, your TTT mind is incapable of embarrassing me. However, learning to spell might save you from future embarrassment.

HTH and pwn3d!
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 11, 2005, 09:19:12 PM
The proof is in the pudding.

Care to elaborate?
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on January 11, 2005, 09:21:02 PM
"1. Don't act like a religious fanatic or an escaped Taliban commando the next time you advocate DL- it will only make you look crazy, and will hurt your credibility."


Still advocating DL, still feeling good about it.  See my previous post in this thread.  Actually reading the post before you respond will save you embarassment in the future.

Buh-bye.



Your post is not at all responsive to anything I have said. I did not take issue with your support of DL, only with your methods of doing so. The fact that your last post could have been written by a reasonable individual does not negate the raving madness of your other posts, as well as your blog.

Second, your TTT mind is incapable of embarrassing me. However, learning to spell might save you from future embarrassment.

HTH and pwn3d!

I agree.  Bashing very reputable law schools like Boalt by saying DL grads are better attorneys is hardly going to win you favor.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 12, 2005, 06:50:14 PM
I agree, the true TTTs will reveal themselves in due time.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Coregram on January 12, 2005, 08:34:09 PM
Yes......usually here and quite often.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 12, 2005, 09:34:39 PM
Also in the employment realm and in TTT public interest jobs HTH.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: JonR0921 on January 13, 2005, 05:12:16 AM
Also in the employment realm and in TTT public interest jobs HTH.

What's wrong with public interest jobs? 
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 13, 2005, 10:58:12 AM
Nothing, provided you don't mind being poor.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on January 15, 2005, 03:59:19 AM
Good schools don't guarantee good lawyers. 
Good students don't guarantee good lawyers.
Same goes for bad schools and bad students.
A lot goes into the mix. 

when -- God willing -- we finish law school and practice the law, we'll see what works and who's a good lawyer.

The proof is in the pudding.

Care to elaborate?

You make a valid point.  There are those who slip through the cracks at every institution, as there are those who excel at mediocre schools.  However, although there is no objective way to qualitatively judge law school graduates, top law firms still prefer graduates from highly-ranked schools.  That is not to say that they will never hire an exceptional graduate from a 4th Tier school, but the trend certainly doesn't show a preference for the latter. 
 
I am certain that each person who goes to a DL program or a 4th Tier school banks on being just that exceptional graduate, but, by definition, not every DL or 4th Tier grad can be exceptional.  It is naive to go to attend such a program and believe that you have a "good shot" at top law firms when so much evidence points to the contrary.

What DOWNY and some other posters mean, I think, is that those who choose to attend such programs should be more realistic than to believe that the anecdotal evidence about this and that graduate from their program that made it big is going to undoubtedly materialize into reality for them. 
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on January 15, 2005, 01:03:21 PM

What DOWNY and some other posters mean, I think, is that those who choose to attend such programs should be more realistic than to believe that the anecdotal evidence about this and that graduate from their program that made it big is going to undoubtedly materialize into reality for them.

I really doubt anyone going to a non-ABA or distance learning school is really seriously considering BIGLAW in the first place.  People who go the route less traveled are more likely to have the time and interest in helping others.

Money isn't everything.

This article has been circulating around the internet for awhile...

http://www.jd2b.com/VanderbiltLawReview.pdf

It is an EXCELLENT review of the issues of working in certain areas of law and the consequences of a legal career in BIGLAW. 

Here is  my take on public interest law...from Barry Scheck. 

http://www.dljd.net/2005/01/price-of-law-school.html

I will probably never get to the esteemed position that Scheck is in to raise the money to help such individuals, but my DL law degree will allow me to be one of the soldiers.

That is all I ask for...lack of debt will allow me to do whatever it is that I want without having to slave away under the thumb of the wealthy. 



Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 15, 2005, 02:26:47 PM

I don't know, but I have read in many places that HYS and others have grave flaws in their programs.  That's not my opinion.  It's the experts and pundits who say that.  If those experts and pundits are correct, there are parts of my education at NSL that will be superior to those schools, but you don't have an argument with me.  Your argument is with the experts and pundits.  I don't know the first think about HYS and the better schools.  I'm not in a position to judge them.  Any criticisms I've leveled against them are echoes of those experts and pundits.

What "experts" do you speak of? The vast, overwhelming majority of law school "experts" hold HYS in the highest esteeem.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on January 15, 2005, 02:30:37 PM
Good points.  I haven't suggested or at least I did not mean to suggest that DL and non-ABA or lower ranked schools are the equivalent to HYS and other very good 'regular' schools.

My point has been that my school and schools like it offer situations that work for their students.  It may be that we can't move to a better school, or our LSATs aren't as good or we have to work, or we have familys to care for. 

I do not expect my legal education to measure up to others.  I don't have the time or the opportunities.  At the same time, I don't need some of the opportunities that HYS provide.  NSL fits my needs and supports my goals. 

I don't know, but I have read in many places that HYS and others have grave flaws in their programs.  That's not my opinion.  It's the experts and pundits who say that.  If those experts and pundits are correct, there are parts of my education at NSL that will be superior to those schools, but you don't have an argument with me.  Your argument is with the experts and pundits.  I don't know the first think about HYS and the better schools.  I'm not in a position to judge them.  Any criticisms I've leveled against them are echoes of those experts and pundits.

But I don't think it helps the discussion for some people to abuse those who are in less prestigious and unconvential schools, because we may be happy with our choices.  These schools work for us.  Will they give us what we want in the future?  There's evidence that it will.  It will not land us in BIGLAW in Manhattan or a seat on the Supreme Court, but only the unrealistically optimistic among us even consider such things from a seat in a night law school.

I agree that there are justifiable reasons to attend night programs, DL programs and non-ABA schools.  There are financial, family and geographic considerations at stake for some students that are not at stake for others.  I don't get off on punishing people for rational choices that they made in life.  

I did not really have a problem with this thread until someone chose to "abuse" MY school, by insinuating that DL graduates have superior educations.  Notice, I did not say that I would be getting an education superior to yours; all I pointed out was that large firms, for whatever reason, prefer top graduates.  This preference has nothing to do with me or my opinion (for those of you defaming me), and I feel no need to apologize for it.  

The point is, while those people who attend non-traditional programs scream for respect, they defame other programs in the process.  Perhaps I am wrong, but I think it's highly hypocritical to demand that respect while providing anecdotal evidence that an attorney graduate from a top school is basically incompetent.  If you (this is directed to all the posters) want respect, show some!
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: DOWNY on January 15, 2005, 02:53:55 PM
I noticed that one poster went too far in praising DL programs. 

I agree with you JeffJoe. Let's be best friends.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: menotomy on April 15, 2005, 06:52:26 PM
If you graduate from a non aba jd i think you can still be admitted to st thomas, miami's llm program, the tax llm is online, this will let you into some states the best way to go is to go the the rules of the state you want to practice in, many for example once admitted then you can go to and take their bar exam



§ 7. Requirements for admission -- Applicants admitted to the practice of law in another jurisdiction of the United States
(a) Each applicant who has been admitted to the practice of law in another jurisdiction of the United States may be admitted upon motion and without examination in this state provided that at the time of application the applicant has been actively engaged in the practice of law for five of the preceding ten years in one or more jurisdictions of the United States, is currently licensed to practice in at least one such jurisdiction, and is not under suspension or revocation in any jurisdiction. Any part of the five-year admission requirement is waived to the extent that any jurisdiction in which the applicant is currently licensed and in which the applicant has actively engaged in the practice of law for not less than six months requires fewer than five years admission as a condition of admission upon motion and without examination for attorneys licensed in this state, provided, however, that at the time of application the applicant has been actively engaged in the practice of law for not less than three of the preceding ten years in one or more jurisdictions of the United States, is currently licensed to practice in at least one such jurisdiction and is not under suspension or revocation in any jurisdiction.

(b) Each applicant who at the time of application has been admitted and has engaged in the practice of law for less than five of the preceding ten years in one or more jurisdictions of the United States, is currently licensed to practice in at least one such jurisdiction, and is not under suspension or revocation in any jurisdiction may be admitted after examination as described in § 6(a)-(e).
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 16, 2005, 01:53:52 AM
If you graduate from a non aba jd i think you can still be admitted to st thomas, miami's llm program, the tax llm is online, this will let you into some states the best way to go is to go the the rules of the state you want to practice in, many for example once admitted then you can go to and take their bar exam



§ 7. Requirements for admission -- Applicants admitted to the practice of law in another jurisdiction of the United States

Yes, but will it teach you to use proper punctuation in your sentences?
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: grownUp on April 19, 2005, 01:27:22 PM
I'm hoping this thread has exhausted itself of the juvenile rantings presented over the last several board pages.

It seems a very important point has been underemphasized - DL coursework is an excellent opportunity for a GROWN-UP to continue their education. I have already done my undergraduate work(Stanford).  I have already paid off my student loans. I already have a career. I have kids, a mortgage, cars and even, gasp, a country club membership - What I don't have is Time.

Are there any adults out there who are considering DL law school? Specifically, Concord? What are you thinking?
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: drewnrupe on April 19, 2005, 02:06:35 PM
Hey Grownup,
Seriously considering Concorde myself at the moment.  Gone through all the arguments know the limitations etc. still think it is my best way forward at the moment.  Have a career , want the knowledge, want to learn again, added string to my bow but not loking to start at a big law firm or practice law full time even.

I had first looked a this a few months back at whcich time On-Line lawschool meant Concord.  Has something changed or is it just that a number of what were correspondance schools now call themselves on-line ? There suddenly seems to be a lot more schools touting on-line JDs.

If we put aside all the restrictions of DL law schools has anybody any input on their differences relative to each other as opposed to telling me again how much better four years spent in class feeling OLD would be :-)  Dont get me wrong If I had the time to go to school full time I would consider it,  In my position the commitment to 4 evenings a week isnt practical either or I may consider that  ( despite the extra 10 G a year that would be for my local law schools part time program )

Thanks

D
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Nontradstudent on April 19, 2005, 11:32:16 PM
As another grown up  (hey! When did that happen? I don't recall signing a consent...)  With a career and commitments, DL is the only way for me.  I loked at almost all the DL schools, and it came down to Concord or NWCU.  They have similar pass rates on the baby and general bars. I was able to track down practicing alumni of both.  With most things being equal, it came down to cost.  NWCU is only 3,000 a year.  Much less than concord.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: grownUp on April 20, 2005, 04:03:27 PM
I suppose I should check out NWCU...

Is the solitary difference cost?

I have discovered the number of Online programs for Masters degrees has really grown over the past year. University of Minnesota (a very good school IMHO) is offering a bunch of DL courses. Oberlin(!) is too, and quite a number of other excellent traditional universities.

I'm finding that quite a few have the audacity to charge the same amount in tuition no matter if you are online on on campus.... It'll be interesting to watch this learning method continue to evolve. It certainly cannot replace the all important ON Campus experience, however once you have been there done that etc, etc.....
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sharkfish on April 21, 2005, 09:12:57 PM
You may want to take a look at the archives on my blog at

http://www.dljd.net

I am a Taft student and I like it so far.  I chose Taft partly because they are nationally accredited.

My blog has a lot of stuff.  It is organized chronologically though, so I'd start in Jan 2005 archives, unless you just want to read backwards. :)

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 22, 2005, 04:16:46 PM
<<Yes, but will it teach you to use proper punctuation in your sentences?>>

Apparently, your school hasn't taught you manners. Perhaps you require all posts you read to demonstrate perfect punctuation...nobody else is bound by that requirement, however...nor does it indicate an inability to use proper punctuation or grammer.

The poster provided information that is likely to be useful to somebody. Who cares about the punctuation? (besides you, I mean)

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 22, 2005, 04:20:40 PM
<<
I suppose I should check out NWCU... >>

I am a 1L at NWCUL and have only praise for the institution. My education has been right on par with my expectations...and I find I am able to hold my own in a local study group amongst ABA 1L evening students. (San Diego).

Here is a link to a firm where a NWCU graduate is employed as an associate:

http://www.chicolaw.com/Bio/DavidGriffith.aspDavid Griffith  (http://www.chicolaw.com/Bio/DavidGriffith.aspDavid Griffith)

Good luck with your decision...whatever you decide.

Law543

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 22, 2005, 04:24:25 PM
You may want to take a look at the archives on my blog at

http://www.dljd.net

I am a Taft student and I like it so far.  I chose Taft partly because they are nationally accredited.

My blog has a lot of stuff.  It is organized chronologically though, so I'd start in Jan 2005 archives, unless you just want to read backwards. :)



Hi,

I have really been enjoying your blog...lots of good helps, information, and fun stuff. In fact, I recently posted a link to a law firm who has a NWCUL graduate...got it from your site.

Great to see you here!

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 22, 2005, 09:38:46 PM
<<Yes, but will it teach you to use proper punctuation in your sentences?>>

Apparently, your school hasn't taught you manners. Perhaps you require all posts you read to demonstrate perfect punctuation...nobody else is bound by that requirement, however...nor does it indicate an inability to use proper punctuation or grammer.

The poster provided information that is likely to be useful to somebody. Who cares about the punctuation? (besides you, I mean)

Law543

In a profession that judges you on your articulateness, it usually helps to develop a habit of using proper grammar and punctuation.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 01:56:19 AM
<<In a profession that judges you on your articulateness, it usually helps to develop a habit of using proper grammar and punctuation.>>

Well, if we were all using our posts here in the forum as potential job applications...your argument would have merit. As it is...we are mostly hear for leisure conversation and friendly exchanges. Besides...it's not as if the poster's punctuation was a major train wreck. He left off a simple punctuation in a post that was probably written in haste...it's primary purpose, to give valuable information in a short amount of time.

Snobbishly snubbing your nose at his grammer instead of being appreciative of the information he was trying to provide, albeit with a punctuation error...says more about you...than him.

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 12:11:59 PM
<<In a profession that judges you on your articulateness, it usually helps to develop a habit of using proper grammar and punctuation.>>

Well, if we were all using our posts here in the forum as potential job applications...your argument would have merit. As it is...we are mostly hear for leisure conversation and friendly exchanges. Besides...it's not as if the poster's punctuation was a major train wreck. He left off a simple punctuation in a post that was probably written in haste...it's primary purpose, to give valuable information in a short amount of time.

Snobbishly snubbing your nose at his grammer instead of being appreciative of the information he was trying to provide, albeit with a punctuation error...says more about you...than him.

Law543

The earlier you learn that as a lawyer you are judged in EVERYTHING you do, whether specifically related to law or not, the better off you will be.  The legal profession is one in which you are always scrutinized and your image depends greatly on your ability to act like a knowledgeable professional at all times.  A three-line run-on sentence doesn't exactly meet that goal.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 05:08:14 PM
<<The earlier you learn that as a lawyer you are judged in EVERYTHING you do, whether specifically related to law or not, the better off you will be.>>

Oh, lovely...tell me...how should I clean my bathroom in lawerly fashion?

<<The legal profession is one in which you are always scrutinized and your image depends greatly on your ability to act like a knowledgeable professional at all times.>>

That is true only in circumstances where it is appropriate to act like a "knowledgeable professional". When I clean my bathroom....I can sing, dance, whistle, or quote Aristotle if I so choose...I can even do it using bad grammar...and all of this has zero  bearing on whether or not I will be or am a knowledgeable and professional lawyer.

Posting in a leisurely law student's forum does not necessarily have any bearing on whether one is knowledgeable...or professional. Certainly you'd have a better case (not much better) if you could demonstrate the poster's chronic propensity for using  bad punctuation...or exhibiting rude, vulgar, or anti-social behavior (as I think you are doing, actually). Your little zinger was over a post whose primary purpose was to leisurely provide helpful information to other law students...and where the punctuation was hardly a critical issue, even if the punctuation error was big (it wasn't). Only a "grammer police" snoot would scrutinize it as you did...while completely ignoring the helpful information he was trying to provide.

As a corporate professional, daily I encounter emails from colleagues who barely use punctuation at all when communicating back and forth. Whether or not it is annoying to some...or whether or not the advent of digitial communication over the internet is to blame for this phenomenon...is for a different discussion. That it shows a lack of knowledge or professionalism is hardly a reality that has been shown by you...your posts...or by anyone else, for that matter. There is no reason to even think that this is the case, at all.

<<A three-line run-on sentence doesn't exactly meet that goal.>>

Oh, my mistake...I thought you were a law student. Apparently you've not read many judge's opinions, if you believe that run-on sentences indicate a deviation from the goal of showing professionalism or knowledge.

Maybe you should crack the case books a bit more?

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 05:53:05 PM
When all else fails, resort to extremism that defies all logic and fails to effectively rebut the point made by your oponent.  ::) I suppose if people routinely scrutinize YOU while you sing in the shower, clean your bathroom, etc., then it would be advisable for you to act professionally. 

I am more inclined to let Cardozo get away with run-on sentences.  When you are a world-renowned legal theorist, run-on sentences are less likely to undercut your credibility.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: rooskie on April 23, 2005, 08:32:03 PM
Hey Ruskie,

How does one act professionally (like a lawyer) by posting constant sexual anecdotes and telling everyone about how many black men she's slept with? Your sexual escapades on the BLSD thread prove what a miserable hypocrite you are.

Boalt is one of the worst schools in the T-14 and you have mediocre grades at best. HTH
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 09:04:15 PM
<<When all else fails, resort to extremism that defies all logic and fails to effectively rebut the point made by your oponent.>>

It would be a great argument.....except you don't show *how* what I've said defies all logic, etc, etc. Remember...the best lawyers don't just state conclusions...they show the reasoning that *justifies* a conclusion. You don't need a lawyer or a law student to make unequivocal statements with no justification or reasoning (like you just did). You do, however, need either a lawyer, a law student, or one skilled at making logical and cohesive arguments to justify a conclusion, such as the conclusion you just made.

If you aren't a law student...you should've said as much.

<<I suppose if people routinely scrutinize YOU while you sing in the shower, clean your bathroom, etc., then it would be advisable for you to act professionally.>>

Oh...then you didn't mean it when you said "at all times"? Woops!!

<<I am more inclined to let Cardozo get away with run-on sentences.  When you are a world-renowned legal theorist, run-on sentences are less likely to undercut your credibility.>>

I see. First of all, most of the "run-on-sentences" made by judges...aren't done so by "world-reknowned" judges. Reading your case book would assist you in this common knowledge.

Further...what you mean, then, is that this measuring stick of "professionalism and knowledge" that you arbitrarily created...has arbitrary rules that you govern...which you will obviously mete out at your whim, when convenient to backpedal in an argument. Got it.

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 09:09:46 PM
If I wasn't a law student, why would I post here? ::)  Good lawyers also don't make unwarranted assumptions.

Even long-winded judges know to put a period at the end of a sentence.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: rooskie on April 23, 2005, 09:13:23 PM
Nice post law543.

Notice how Ruskie proves incapable of answering any of the contentions you made as well as my claim that she is a hypocrite by virtue of the fact that constant talk of sexual encounters defies professionalism.

I suppose this is to be expected from someone who can't get higher than a "Pass" at a T.T.T.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 09:26:53 PM
<<If I wasn't a law student, why would I post here?>>

If you aren't a law student and you are posting here...that would be a question only you can answer. And if you thought that this statement of yours is *proof* that you are a law student...apparently Boalt isn't teaching you much about reasoned arguments. Of course, most learn that sort of information in undergrad.

<<Even long-winded judges know to put a period at the end of a sentence.>>

They might always know...but do they always "do"? In order to answer that...you'd have to locate the editors of every case book in existence to determine if they ever left out a period. My guess is....they do on occasion. (and I think you know this, as well, even if you won't admit it.)

Further, do they always include the requisite commas? If so...and YOU made this argument...shall I show you 3 posts I found of yours just in the last 10 minutes where you left out requisite punctuation? Or will you now just cut your losses, admit you were wrong about tromping down on that one poster unjustifiably?

Let's hope your ethical nature will finally out.

<<Good lawyers also don't make unwarranted assumptions.>>

"Unwarranted" is a subjective term, conveniently posited by one trying to win an argument. Your "unwarranted" is another student's "warranted". Since my conclusions were justified (feel free to review the posts) in a reasoned manner using your own words...and you made no arguments in response (except unequivocal statements with no reasoned justification)...I feel better about mine.

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 09:34:23 PM
Nice post law543.

Notice how Ruskie proves incapable of answering any of the contentions you made as well as my claim that she is a hypocrite by virtue of the fact that constant talk of sexual encounters defies professionalism.

I suppose this is to be expected from someone who can't get higher than a "Pass" at a T.T.T.

It certainly shows that the best students and lawyers aren't always found at Boalt. *laughs*

(notice that Russkie Girl continues to rate my posts negatively. She's an interesting one, I'll give her that.)

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 09:47:39 PM
Law543,

You play some creative, albeit unimpressive, semantics games.  If you review my post, I never said that judges ALWAYS put periods at the end of sentences.  Although I suspect they do so the vast majority of the time, I am not so naive as to believe that NO legal opinion in existence contains such an omission.  Saying that a party "knows" to do something is very different from saying they "always" do that thing.  Please refrain from putting words in my mouth and basing your arguments on things I did not say.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: rooskie on April 23, 2005, 10:01:06 PM
Ok, let's talk about things you did say. How were you acting professionally while regaling the board with your sexual adventures with black men? The "broom closet" conversations on BLSD are one of numerous examples.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 10:03:40 PM
Ok, let's talk about things you did say. How were you acting professionally while regaling the board with your sexual adventures with black men? The "broom closet" conversations on BLSD are one of numerous examples.



Apparently your 99th percentile LSAT score has failed to give you a sense of humor and an ability to spot jokes.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 10:10:32 PM
<<You play some creative, albeit unimpressive, semantics games.>>

Why, thank you. I aim to please. Incidentally, I thought I would make it public that in private PM you arrogantly and immaturely attempted to make me feel "less than" you by saying that we will, based upon our respective law schools, be in different professional settings once we graduate...as if that were a good argument.

Do you even care how this sort of insipid statement paints a picture of you? Do you realize how much maturing one must endure before they would find such a statement to be silly and purile? *laughs*

That is the sort of mentality that most well-adjusted individuals leave behind once they graduate from high school. It was a very telling statement on your part, that's for sure.


<<If you review my post, I never said that judges ALWAYS put periods at the end of sentences.>>

I said you said this....where?

<<Although I suspect they do so the vast majority of the time, I am not so naive as to believe that NO legal opinion in existence contains such an omission.>>

Yet, this one arbitrary thing you decided upon which to focus...is what you decided (arbitrarily) was the measuring stick for professionalism and knowledge. Perhaps the poster you insulted doesn't do it *all the time* either...yet, that didn't seem to keep you from snobbishly acting like his one punctuation infracture was an insult to your superior intellectual nature.

Why don't you just admit that you were being an ass?

<<Saying that a party "knows" to do something is very different from saying they "always" do that thing.>>

Yet, your insult to the poster in question implied that his one infraction either represented how he posts all of the time...or that you don't really believe what you said above...or that you are now backpedaling.

Which is it?

<<Please refrain from putting words in my mouth and basing your arguments on things I did not say.>>

You say enough things that get you into intellectual and logical peril...than for me to have to have to add anything.

Either say what you DO mean...or refrain from saying anything at all. (or suffer the consequences of doing neither)

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: ruskiegirl on April 23, 2005, 10:24:53 PM
You continue to attribute comments, ideas and qualities to me without having any basis for doing so.  You can save your demonstration of superb intellect for your professors or collegues, or anyone else who cares to listen to your ramblings.  I prefer not to argue with people like you.  You remind me of those people in class who won't shut up because they have an insatiable need to demontrate their collection of 5-dollar words and superior knowledge of the material at hand.  It is my right to limit that torture to the gunners I have to put up with in my classes.  Now if you will please excuse me, I have finals in two weeks and must study.

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 23, 2005, 10:34:24 PM
<<You continue to attribute comments, ideas and qualities to me without having any basis for doing so.>>

Well, let's review what you did say to me: "I suspect we will find ourselves in very different professional settings upon the completion of law school." 

That was a lovely demonstration...wasn't it? Apparently you do lack integrity and grace...because what person of integrity and grace would stoop to such a level as to suggest that your professional position deems you any better than anyone else?

(you claimed in PM that you weren't being superior in this statement of yours...but in the context you gave it...coupled with a post made recently to a non-traditional law student...I find it hard to believe that you didn't mean it in that context...but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.)

<<You can save your demonstration of superb intellect for your professors or collegues, or anyone else who cares to listen to your ramblings.>>

No, I think I'll save them for individuals who make an ass of themselves in public. Since I never claimed to be of superior intellect...yet you DID claim to be superior, based upon the school you atttend...I'll leave it to the casual reader to decide whose statements are based in logical reasoning and whose are based on pompous arrogance and juvenile tendencies.

<<I prefer not to argue with people like you.>>

Yet, you have been attempting to argue. Odd statements you make.

<<You remind me of those people in class who won't shut up because they have an insatiable need to demontrate their collection of 5-dollar words and superior knowledge of the material at hand.>>

Oh, so the psychological hangups with which you are so plagued are not limited in their expression to this forum...apparently it bleeds over into your reaction to your classmates, as well. Tell me...will the problems you say they have also render them in an inferior professional setting as well once they graduate...or is this insult limited to those you encounter online?

<<<<Now if you will please excuse me, I have finals in two weeks and must study.>>

Let's hope you apply better logic and reasoning skills in that endeavor than you apply here. Maybe once you are in your superior professional setting beyond graduation...you'll feel better.

Law543
Title: Back to Concord Law School. . .
Post by: allicatOU on April 24, 2005, 09:17:11 PM
Hi all -

Thought I'd bring this discussion full circle back to the Concord discussion. . .

I'm really interested in your thoughts on my dilemma.

I am a full-time online professor.  I've been teaching online for about six years, FT for about a year.  As others have posted in this and other threads, without a doubt, online courses are just as (if not more) challenging than F2F ones.  I went to a "brick and mortar" school for undergrad and graduate school and have taught a myriad of courses both online and F2F.  Alternately, I realize that there is still a stigma about online ed.

So, here's my dilemma. . .

If I do not wish to practice law and only want the JD because of the need for a terminal degree in upper-level administrative positions within higher education is Concord the way to go?  As all of you, I'm quite busy (FT career, young kids, etc.) so a "traditional" law program is out of the question, but recognize that I cannot move much higher in my career without a doctorate degree.  Alternately, I am much more interested in law course work than the courses required within a doctorate in education, psychology, etc.

I look forward to seeing your thoughts on this; thank you in advance.
Title: Re: Back to Concord Law School. . .
Post by: law543 on April 25, 2005, 01:48:07 AM
Hi all -

Thought I'd bring this discussion full circle back to the Concord discussion. . .

I'm really interested in your thoughts on my dilemma.

I am a full-time online professor.  I've been teaching online for about six years, FT for about a year.  As others have posted in this and other threads, without a doubt, online courses are just as (if not more) challenging than F2F ones.  I went to a "brick and mortar" school for undergrad and graduate school and have taught a myriad of courses both online and F2F.  Alternately, I realize that there is still a stigma about online ed.

So, here's my dilemma. . .

If I do not wish to practice law and only want the JD because of the need for a terminal degree in upper-level administrative positions within higher education is Concord the way to go?  As all of you, I'm quite busy (FT career, young kids, etc.) so a "traditional" law program is out of the question, but recognize that I cannot move much higher in my career without a doctorate degree.  Alternately, I am much more interested in law course work than the courses required within a doctorate in education, psychology, etc.

I look forward to seeing your thoughts on this; thank you in advance.

I would venture a guess that any online law school (barring those with terrible reputations within the subculture of online schools) would be sufficient to achieve your goal. Concord, I believe, is the most "prestigious" within the online law community...but they haven't been around the longest, nor do they have the best reputation or bar passage-rate stats. Yet...they are one of the most expensive, if not THE most. I don't even fully understand Concord's claim of being the first completely online juris doctor program...because NWCUL has been doing this since the early 80's. Maybe I'm missing what the distinction is.

You might also look into William Howard Taft school of law...as well as Northwestern California school of law. Both will earn you online juris doctors...both offer a non-bar JD...and I don't think choosing one of these lesser expensive schools will be substantially different, with regard to how your degree will be regarded, than if you decide to go with Concord.

At any rate...good luck and let us know what you decide!

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: UCC 2-105 on April 25, 2005, 08:59:39 AM
Technically, the JD degree does not entitle the holder to the title "Doctor."  The law degree that entitles the holder to that title is the Doctor of Juridical Science. If it is the title you are after and you going to stay in academia, there are several online PhD programs.  Personally, I think the JD degree gives you more flexibility.  If you don't want to practice law, then Concord (or one of the other online law programs) would be the way to go.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: law543 on April 25, 2005, 09:40:15 AM
Technically, the JD degree does not entitle the holder to the title "Doctor."  The law degree that entitles the holder to that title is the Doctor of Juridical Science. If it is the title you are after and you going to stay in academia, there are several online PhD programs.  Personally, I think the JD degree gives you more flexibility.  If you don't want to practice law, then Concord (or one of the other online law programs) would be the way to go.

There is an interesting discussion of this distinction here: http://forums.degreeinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9728

Some argue that the term "doctor" used for MD's is more of a recent phenomenon...whereas in the past they were called "physicians". Technically, the JD holder can be called a "doctor" if that were our tradition, for the degree is equivilent to the MD or the DDS (Dentists are also called doctors...yet they don't hold a PhD.) The medical doctor holds an undergraduate degree...then earns the title "doctor" because he holds the graduate degree of "medical doctor"...the dentist holds an undergraduate degree...then earns a graduate degree of "doctor of dental surgery"...likewise, the lawyer earns an undergraduate degree and then earns a graduate degree of "doctor of jurisprudence"...or "juris doctor"...equivilent in law to what the medical graduate earns in medicine or the dental graduate earns in dentistry.

Neither do medical doctors, doctors of dentistry, or doctors of jurisprudence necessarily hold post-graduate doctoral degrees...yet they all, by virtue of the graduate degrees they each respectively earn, can be called "doctors", technically.

I don't think a JD should be called a "doctor"...simply because it's misleading, traditionally, and it would seem strange to hear lawyers called "doctor" in a court of law...though I wouldn't mind if a law professor used the title, as the term seems to traditionally be conferred upon professors.

I would only argue that your statement that "technically" they aren't called "doctor" should instead be stated "traditionally" they aren't called doctor...because "technically", when compared to MDs and DDS degree holders...they are. It just doesn't make sense, traditionally, to confer that title upon lawyers.

Law543
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: dfetter on May 25, 2005, 05:06:59 AM
I am jumping into this discussion late, but just happened into it and want to give my opinion of Concord Law School.   I am an alumni and just passed the February 2005 Bar exam (first try).  I did not even take a review program (Concord HIGHLY recommends you DO take a review course, however).  In addition, due to a tragedy in my family just before I completed the program, I studied much less than I would have otherwise.

My success is due to the excellent education and preparation I received at Concord.  The professors are extraordinary.  I have an M.S. also and attended some doctorate level courses, so I have plenty of prior education to compare this experience to. 

Concord is not for everyone.  Due to the nature of the program, it takes a great deal of self-motivation.  The administration and professors are available and extremely  willing to assist at every step, but you must keep pace with the program to succeed.  Additionally, if you are not in CA and wish to practice law, check the requirements of the state you want to practice in.   Some states will let you take their exam after passing the CA bar; others have additional requirements (LLM or years of experience, etc).

If you want the education for the knowledge, not to practice law, this is the way to go.  Concord has an executive JD program which does not require you to take the FYLX, but that will not qualify you to sit for the CA bar. 

As for library, I had done some traditional legal research for a seminar in law I took at Syracuse University many years ago so I can make a comparison.  I cannot imagine why anyone would want to research that old fashioned way with the sources available online.   I know they are expensive, but not in the long run.  You can do in minutes online what takes hours in a traditional library.  Concord gives access to Westlaw and other resources as part of the program.  When comparing the cost of online schools, be sure to find out what research tools they include.  The cost of Concord has increased considerably since I started the program, but even at current rates the price is worth it.  Sometimes you do get what you pay for.



 

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: plumeria on December 23, 2005, 01:45:32 AM
Thanks for the useful information on Concord and the rest. :)
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: duckasourus on February 13, 2006, 11:03:53 AM
can i get some fries with your fake law degree?
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: janieseas on September 19, 2006, 03:26:20 PM
Any alumni from Concord out there can give advice to prospective students considering non tradiional law school? I currently in the process of considering a distance learning law school, Concord is pressing for $$ upfront, and I am not familiar with other on line programs available. I did research the ABA site - currently only 3 states allow correspondence law school students to sit for the bar exam..CA,DC & NM, however there are quite a few states that will allow bar exam entrance after passing in another state- is it worth it to take the bar exam twice? some states will also allow acceptance to the state bar without an exam with certain conditions, (like 5 yrs experience as attorney). Any advice? 
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: sdlaw on September 27, 2006, 09:29:32 PM
I am almost positive that the states that allow you to transfer in after 5 years only apply to ABA graduates and will never let a non-aba grad practice.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: duckasourus on October 02, 2006, 11:41:58 AM
Concord is such a rip off, there are a lot of law schools in California that are ABA, the non ABA schools are horrible and thus lack the ABA status.  I am sure others will say crap about being 40 and not able to go to a traditional school but news flash a fake law degree as a midlife crisis is pathetic.  If online schools were any good they would be accredited but NONE are, you can only take the bar in a few states and CA makes u take the baby bar too and the bar pass rates are HORRIBLE for non ABA schools
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: LegalLatin78 on October 25, 2006, 10:44:14 AM
In all honest truth, here is what every single employer has told me about online law degrees/phd's/masters programs.  If you already have a successful career and want to go into consulting, then the online degree may work for you.  Not many places will take an online degree seriously.  I am not saying this out of agreement with that philosophy, just repeating what I have heard over and over again.  I have worked in arbitration, mediation, and dispute resolution.  Some of the arbitrators and mediators had studied and received degrees through DL.  I have yet to meet anyone in private practice or working for the gov't, state, local law who went through DL. 
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: landrover06 on November 12, 2006, 01:03:36 AM
I don't think the ABA will ever accredit Concord.  This is not a bad thing and is no reflection on Concord.  The ABA fears Concord.  How many students would prefer to sit in the privacy of their homes earning an ABA law degree without ever being subjected to the socratic method, the politics, aggravation of competitive classmates, and the high expense?  Enough to greatly diminish the demand for B&M law schools I can tell you that. 

So Concord has established a special niche for itself and the school is relatively new.  It will gain credibility as its graduates disseminate into practice and establish themselves.  It has an impressive bar passage rate for a newer school.  I am impressed with the school and would encourage anyone to take a serious look if their circumstances call for it.  A have always felt that a JD is a valuable degree no matter how you get it.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Mesquite on November 25, 2006, 03:57:50 AM
  I have yet to meet anyone in private practice or working for the gov't, state, local law who went through DL. 

A buddy of mine told me a musician in the band "Country Joe and the Fish" did DL, or correspondence as it was called back then, and was now working as a public defender. 

Thinking he was full of BS, I researched it and lo and behold here is the story:

Barry Melton is THE public defender in Yolo county California.

http://www.counterculture.net/thefish/#bio

http://www.yolocounty.org/org/publicdefender/index.htm

and here is a quote from an interview with him from

http://www.riprense.com/barrymeltonq&a.htm

"MELTON: In California, there are three ways to become a lawyer--go to school, study with a lawyer or study by so-called "distance learning." In my day, "distance learning" meant correspondence study; however, more recently, the term has come to be associated with study over the Internet. I truly don't believe that one method is any harder than the others, as in the end all law students must pass a three-day examination to be admitted to practice. In music, self-directed study is called "woodshedding" and studying law is no more or less difficult than that. And there are well over 100,000 lawyers in California, so whatever it is that it takes to become a lawyer is well within the reach of most people."

Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: brabdau on November 28, 2006, 10:14:15 AM
I am almost positive that the states that allow you to transfer in after 5 years only apply to ABA graduates and will never let a non-aba grad practice.

I've checked a few states that interest me for practice, Arizona and Colorado, both allow you to take their bar after practicing 5 of the last 7 years.  Arizona requires you to hold a JD from an ABA approved school, however, Rule 34 allows for an exception, if you have been admitted to another states bar you can still sit for their bar regardless of your schools accreditation.  Colorado only requires you be admitted in another states bar for the last 5 of 7 years or if your state allows admittance into their bar by motion for Colorado attys then you can be admitted into Colorado’s bar by motion.

I haven't checked all states requirements, but there are definitely states that DO allow DL JD's to practice in their states.
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: Dexter on June 06, 2007, 05:37:01 PM

2. What are Concord's Bar passage rates?
Answer: Concord is a new institution. It was founded in 1998. Only two classes have sat for the California Bar. Six out of the ten students passed the first time out of the original class. Six out of fourteen passed on the first try from the second class. To date: 12 out of 24 have passed the California Bar exam on their first try.

3. How does this compare with other schools?
Answer: Pretty well. On the last Cal Bar exam, 3 of 5 Stanford students passed the exam. Only 38% of USC law school grads passed the same exam. UCLA was the only California school that posted an exceptional pass rate on the Cal Bar at 79%. Cooley, an ABA school in Michigan ,recorded a 0 out of 22 on the same test; no Cooley grad passed the Cal Bar. What does that say about Concord? They are doing pretty well at this point. The Cal Bar seems to be a particularly tough exam.

HOW could your data be so wrong?! In 2004, the bar passage rate in California for first time takers for the following schools was as follows: Stanford - 90%; USC - 79%; UCLA - 89%.

You will NEVER see Stanford, USC, UCLA or any other upper-tier law schools with passage rates as low as you claim.

As far as your claim that California has a difficult bar exam, let's be real: the low passage rate in California is in large part attributable to types of students taking the exam...you have a lot of sub-par students going to sub-par law schools in California, which skews the bar results downward.

Watch your facts before you offer an online informercial again. (And you may want to mention the gaudy 41% passage rate for first time takers of the CA bar for Concord through July '06.)
Title: Re: Concord Law School
Post by: VegasJD on June 28, 2010, 04:55:31 PM

3. How does this compare with other schools?
Answer: Pretty well. On the last Cal Bar exam, 3 of 5 Stanford students passed the exam. Only 38% of USC law school grads passed the same exam. UCLA was the only California school that posted an exceptional pass rate on the Cal Bar at 79%. Cooley, an ABA school in Michigan ,recorded a 0 out of 22 on the same test; no Cooley grad passed the Cal Bar. What does that say about Concord? They are doing pretty well at this point. The Cal Bar seems to be a particularly tough exam.

HOW could your data be so wrong?! In 2004, the bar passage rate in California for first time takers for the following schools was as follows: Stanford - 90%; USC - 79%; UCLA - 89%.

You will NEVER see Stanford, USC, UCLA or any other upper-tier law schools with passage rates as low as you claim.

As far as your claim that California has a difficult bar exam, let's be real: the low passage rate in California is in large part attributable to types of students taking the exam...you have a lot of sub-par students going to sub-par law schools in California, which skews the bar results downward.
Watch your facts before you offer an online informercial again. (And you may want to mention the gaudy 41% passage rate for first time takers of the CA bar for Concord through July '06.)
Actually he was correct for the February 2004 exam.  Go to http://admissions.calbar.ca.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=0T9sI2mkkqo%3d&tabid=2269 and you will see 3 of 5 for first time takers for Stanford, 3 of 8 for first time takers from USC and UCLA as 11 of 14.