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 2 3 4  6 7 8 9 10 ... 56
« on: August 05, 2015, 09:20:27 PM »
Not necessarily Transfers are a huge part of attrition. Florida Coastal reported losing 207 students and 114 were due to Transfers. Well over half of the attrition was due to transfers.
I don't think there is anything wrong with that I don't think anyone will argue Florida Coastal is some elite school, but it gives students a chance. For those that excel and can get into Florida or FSU second year and get in-state tuition at a more respected school why not transfer.
I don't think FCSL claims to be anything other than what it is an ABA school that will teach you the law.
« on: August 05, 2015, 07:15:08 PM »
Or that their students transferred (not a scam).
No student should go into LS expecting to transfer, but if your in the Top 10% at Florida Coastal and can transfer into FSU or Florida and pay 1/3 of the Tuition to attend a better school why not Transfer.
« on: August 05, 2015, 07:13:00 PM »
Yea that is basically exactly the case.
It was b.s. that is was three days and other states weren't. However, I had to do it. I get to female dog and moan about it that is my right. However, it will be two days and for those that enrolled in law school in 2014 they got a sweet bonus.
A piece of me wonders if Chemerinsky's prior attack on the bar is related to this sudden change. He has to keep his job at Irvine and boost his BarBri stats the man has to eat. If he was at all involved good for him for wielding that much power.
Maybe one day Chemy will get on male private part Cheney's level of being able to shoot someone in the face and have the person apologize for letting their face get in the way of the bullet. That is Chuck Norris sh*t.
« on: August 04, 2015, 12:29:53 PM »
I read the article so 5 five essays and one ninety minute Practical exam and that is the same difficultly? False it is not.
The practical portion is what messes most people up and there is one less and it is half the size. This is bogus and I will tell kids I walk uphill both ways in the terrible L.A Winters forty years from now when Donald Trump is Dictator of the U.S. and the exam consists of the following multiple choice question
What is an element of negligence?
B. This is not the answer
C. This is not the answer
D. If you select A you will pass.
« on: August 04, 2015, 12:23:55 PM »
F. Media loves him and will keep reporting that he is ahead my wide margins in the polls they make up and then people will vote for the name recognition then 2020 a Kardashian will win and the world will end.
« on: August 03, 2015, 06:16:12 PM »
Cal-Bar is shortening the exam from three days to two. Maybe they will hand out participation ribbons next.
If I could pass a 3 day exam plenty of people can. I don't think the bar exam needs to be easier there are plenty of jokers out there capable of passing a three day exam. What will this bring on.
Probably just more pissed that I had to take a 3 day exam and others will not.
« on: August 03, 2015, 04:09:34 PM »
I am not even defending it.
Just saying the school does not want to dismiss people. They have lower admission standards, which means statistically there will be more academic dismissal, but no school anywhere wants to lose a paying student.
No law firm wants to lose a paying client, no Bank wants to lose a paying customer, etc.
Schools actively try to recruit students and they want to keep them. Particularly a school like Florida Coastal that is dealing with fringe students in the first place. However, if a 1L cannot get the basics of IRAC on an easy torts exam they got to go, but if everyone at Florida Coastal nailed their exams and it seemed each was fully capable of passing the bar Florida Coastal would love to keep collecting money.
Since you seem so adamant against this may I ask what a school gains by dismissing a student? Why would a school want that to happen?
It happens of course, but a school would rather have paying students unless you can think of a reason they wouldn't. I can't.
« on: August 03, 2015, 02:37:58 PM »
But you have to look at the facts with more depth. Yes 30.5% is the attrition no question, but it does not mean 30.5% failed out. http://www.lsac.org/docs/default-source/official-guide-2014/aba5320.pdf
The total attrition was 207 students.
83 of the 207 were for academic purposes.
123 was for other and 114 of these other were transfers.
So at the end of the day the academic attrition was a little over 10% not 30%.
The majority of the students that did really well transferred to other schools, which Florida Coastal probably did not like. 114 students transferring means they lost millions of dollars and they would certainly have loved for the 83 that were dismissed for academic reasons to stay, but they have an obligation to dismiss someone that clearly will not pass the bar. However, if they are dismissed and show that they can learn from their mistakes a second chance is looming as again losing 83 students is millions more dollars lost in tuition.
People just look at attrition and assume it means everyone failed out, but at most T4's with high attrition the majority of it is due to transfers not failing out.
« on: August 03, 2015, 01:31:00 PM »
Yes they do.
Even Cooley and Florida Coastal would rather have students pay two years of tuition opposed to fail them out. If a student is clearly and I mean clearly not going to pass the bar at some point they have to fail them out, but flunking out students costs money and the reputation of people flunking out and telling everyone they know how much X school sucks is worse than even a poor ranking.
Cooley and Coastal know they are never going to be elite schools and there is no school that wants to kick any student out, but it of course happens. However, even if someone is academically dismissed and puts work in, shows competence, etc they are likely to let the student back in.
At my school I knew a girl that failed out 1L. She never attended class and when she did facebook the whole time, never did the work etc. She slacked off 1L and to no surprise she was dismissed. However, the school said she could reapply if she passed the baby-bar. She got her sh*t together and passed went on to graduate, passed the Cali bar, etc.
Other students didn't get the wake up call and were not readmitted.
Each student brings a school upwards of $30,000-$40,000 a year. They don't want to lose $60,000-$80,000 of income by dismissing a student that is capable.
As for the scholarships schools do entice students to enroll and make it hard to maintain the conditions. Again, it is mostly about money above all else as everything in business ends up being.
No school wants a student to fail out. Ideally, a school would love all their students to graduate (while paying full tuition), pass the bar, get a job so the school can hit up the grads for donations later.
« on: August 03, 2015, 11:59:20 AM »
That's great and yea I know there are a bunch of people that claim schools have to flunk you out etc, but that is as usual random internet b.s. Law schools are businesses they want to make money from their students who pay tuition. They are also not a-holes and want their students to succeed. If you did well enough on the LSAT and had a decent UGPA then you have the intelligence to pass the bar and have a successful legal career. That doesn't mean you will, but the potential is there and if you struggle 1L, but realize there are things you can do differently they are happy to readmit you.
It sounds like you learned a lot from the experience and will probably be a better attorney. You got your ass kicked 1L most lawyers don't get that kick in the ass until after the bar exam.
Keep working hard and good things will happen!
Pages: 1 2 3 4  6 7 8 9 10 ... 56