« on: December 24, 2011, 01:06:58 PM »
"Here's the problem, though. If your argument is that DL and various unaccredited schools are just as good at educating students as ABA schools, the one area where this demonstrably falls flat is on bar passage rates.
It's not enough just to say, "this education is every bit as good." Unless you can show it somehow, it's not unreasonable to dismiss such assertions.
Already, the unaccredited schools have a foot in the hole. They don't have the library facilities. Not sure what they do as far as classroom hours. So, a lot of things the ABA says are necessary for a good legal education are missing.
It is perfectly valid to counter, "Well, the ABA is wrong, those things are NOT required for a good legal education".
Trouble is, when time comes to take the bar, the ABA schools are in a completely different universe than the schools that claim to be "just as good."
Close that gap on bar passage rate, and I think an alternative accrediation body would have a very, very legitimate argument.
I think there's a lot of improvements that could be made. I think a large library is a great resource to the legal community and others who need access to legal research material. However, I think for the purposes of education, you could get everything you need via your laptop and you'd be just fine.
Ultimately, though, the argument for alternative accreditation standards should be, "it is just as good". Right now, at best, the argument is, "once in a while, an exceptionally bright person choses to get their legal education this way... that person is by far the exception."
[/quote] - FalconJimmy
I actually have no problem with high standards for online/distance law school admission. I also think this would improve the bar passage rate and help improve the way this type of education is viewed. Perhaps, case studies of those students who have entered an online/distance law program AND have managed to come out licensed attorneys in the end, would help figure out what those standards should be.