« on: June 02, 2006, 01:47:32 AM »
Sorry, I just saw the bottom of your post where you asked for additional pros. I would say you hit on the major ones. I would probably add that William Mitchell's use of adjuncts is probably a pro for a lot of upper levels. I have heard the quality of people they bring in is very high, and it goes along well with their practical skills approach. Additionally this provides some good networking in that your profs for certain classes are established members of the Twin Cities legal community. One other con is that they only have one law journal, which surprises me really. Also keep in mind when you say that St. Thomas has good employment rates, the question is where are they employed? I know they claim a slightly higher bar passage rating than Mitchell right now, but the school still needs to prove itself. Saint Thomas seems to be attracting similar firms to OCI's to an extent, but more are likely to hire Mitchell grads. Even the Saint Thomas career service office website seems to be more public service oriented, and this might be in part due to that is what is easiest for STU grads to get. Perhaps the heaps of money they have will help them go tier 3 like all the speculators are saying, but this will be some time from now. I really think if Mitchell curbs enrollment a bit they should bounce back to tier 3 where they have historically been. WM seems to be the safer bet, even if Saint Thomas is the shinier building.