If they are all so bad, why not shut them all down and require any new ones have (at a minimum) regional accrediting like Concord and require things like real time chat and other aspects found at more respected online schools like UOP with set due dates and timed online exams with real time mandatory seminars with Q&A?If they required all that, it might make people give it more respect and be a better sell to ABA.First step if that is the goal is to shut down 99% of what is out there and rebuild from the ashes.
Anyone who graduates from an online law school and passes the California bar on their first attempt, as Jon did, would likely have excelled at any traditional law school. The standard ABA approved methodology may not be the only way to learn the law, but for the majority of students it is probably the best way. The socratic method and mandatory classroom participation forces students to prepare. Is that paternalistic? Sure, but it seems to work. The state bar approved law schools in California have essentially adopted the same methodology, and their bar pass rates tend to be higher than those of online schools. BTW, I am not the least bit snobby when it comes to ABA vs. non-ABA. I believe that the ABA requirements can be absurd, and I know plenty of great lawyers who graduated from non-ABA schools. For MOST students, however, the traditional law school methodolgy seems to produce more favorable results.
That's because per CA philosophy, anyone regardless of education can take the CA bar.