This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Citylaw
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25  27 28 29 30 31 ... 44
« on: May 13, 2014, 08:58:18 PM »
Again, I believe it is due to economics schools used to have higher standards, but kicking out the floaters results in substantial economic loss.
At almost every law school in America there are probably a few people that should not be there. Dismissing students that do not appear capable of passing the bar are better served to be dismissed after 1L in my opinon as taking 2 more years of their lives and 60-80k of their money is wrong.
Or at risk students should have to be informed of what to expect prior to starting 2L. I believe attrition was higher, because schools were not as tuition hungry, but with the influx of schools there is more of a focus on revenue than education, which is harming legal education and the legal profession.
Bottom line I think law school attrition should go up as it would be fairer to at risk students and improve the legal profession.
« on: May 13, 2014, 03:41:21 PM »
I think it has much more to do with economics than hand holding. If schools routinely failed out 33% of their class they would lose large amounts of tuition money. Again, proving the point no school wants to kick students out removing one student can result in a loss of 60k to 80k over two years.
« on: May 12, 2014, 08:07:31 PM »
It is probably the right decision you do not want to attend law school if your not ready. It is not going anywhere and rushing into a program for no real reason usually turns out poorly.
I encourage you to reapply to Widener and other schools when everything in your life is settled.
« on: May 12, 2014, 08:01:35 PM »
Excellent posts Maintain and every single school has attrition and it can happen for a number of reasons as Maintain cites. Part Timers are the mostly likely to drop out for non-academic reasons as they simply do not have time to complete law school.
One thing is certain though no school wants their students to fail out removing paying tuition paying students and reporting attrition to LSAC is not something any law school wants to do, but at the end of the day it is up to the individual student to do what is necessary to succeed, and if schools are taking money and time from someone that they honestly believe is not capable of passing the bar it is unethical and potentially illegal.
Similar to the case in Contracts many students read where the dance instructor kept taking money from a 70 year woman who the instructor convinced woudl be a professional dancer if she kept taking lessons. Here is a summary of the case http://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/contracts/contracts-keyed-to-knapp/avoiding-enforcement-incapacity-bargaining-misconduct-unconscionability-and-public-policy/syester-v-banta/
Law school is no different if someone is incapable of getting passing grades on 1L exams where you have multiple days to review one subject and you know exactly what will be on the exam then there is no way you will be capable of handling the bar exam.
« on: May 11, 2014, 03:53:49 PM »
The Attrition stats on LSAC can be misleading. It is true 30.1% of the class or a total of 55 student did not attend Widener for 2L.
However, only 23 of the 55 student were dismissed for academic performance the other 32 left for other reasons 17 of that 32 were transfer students likely to higher ranked schools. A number of people after 1L either choose not to continue with their legal education, have a family emergency, are offered a job that does not require a J.D. etc.
In reality about 12% of the Widener 1L class failed out not 30%.
The purpose of this post is that many people believe law schools attempt or have to fail students out, which is absolutely not true. Remember at the end of the day a law school is a business and they want their students to succeed and pay tuition. ABA schools however, have an ethical obligation to dismiss students they feel are incapable of passing a bar exam since it would be wrong to take two more years of their life and $60,000 more in tuition fees when it is clear the student is not capable of passing the bar.
If a student cannot handle 1L there is no way they will pass the bar and schools academically dismiss students, but there is no requirement to do and every single law school in America would love to have 0% attrition; 100% bar passage rate; and every dime of student tuition collected, but that doesn't happen anywhere, because when dealing with 500 individual law students at any law school there will be personal issues that will lead to success or failure at any institution.
« on: May 08, 2014, 11:41:23 PM »
It used to be similar to top law schools full of a bunch negative people that had no idea what they were talking about arguing with eachother.
The forum has less activity now, but there is no negativity, which leads to actual advice that might actually help make the right law school decision.
« on: May 08, 2014, 10:40:25 PM »
I do not know anything specifically about Widener, but I think the program makes sense for those that really want to attend law school.
It is my understanding that TAP compromises of students without sufficient numbers to be accepted into most law schools. However, the numbers are not necessarily indicative of success in law school or legal education.
On the first day of law school your GPA/LSAT means nothing to perfectly I cannot even remember what my LSAT score was.
At my school a few bragged about their LSAT score since it was well above the median etc, but two of those people ended up failing out of law school. You could score 180 on the LSAT if you do not study or are not capable of writing a law school essay you are not getting through 1L or passing the bar.
TAP seems like a program that tests these skills and if you get through the program you will likely do well in law school and pass the bar.
« on: May 08, 2014, 10:28:54 PM »
Realistically I imagine Widener wants you to succeed remember at the end of the day law school is a business and they need tuition money.
I am completely unfamiliar with Widener, but I imagine this program is a way to see if people are capable of putting in the work required for law school. I am sure Widener would love every student in TAP to perform well and pay tuition for three years, but ABA schools need to be sure there students are capable of passing the bar.
I do think a situation of commuting an hour & half for this program is not a good idea. To succeed in law school and the legal profession you need to be all in and 1.5 hour daily commute on top of the rigors of law school is not a good combination.
« on: May 08, 2014, 10:19:58 PM »
You can just pay the deposit at both schools and hold your spot.
Granted you will use between 300-$1,000 dollars, but keeping your option open is certainly worth that.
When I was a 0L I put deposits down at three schools and obviously two of those three I did not end up attending. Every school has a number of people on their waitlist and they are more than happy to take a few hundred dollars from you for nothing.
With that said pay the deposits at both schools so you have time to visit them and make the right choice.
Good luck to you.
« on: April 30, 2014, 01:01:39 PM »
Excellent post and just to clarify relationships can and do work in law school, but add on long distance and the fiancÚ being faced with opportunities at graduation 1,000 miles away and does not have a great chance of success.
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25  27 28 29 30 31 ... 44