Thanks for the link. It applies to a NY school, and Cooley aims it's marketing at those with unquestionably lower levels of education and logic ability (low gpa, low lsat, less than a BA,etc)It seems likes apples to oranges, especially since their ranking system doesn't just talk of employment stats like the NY suit, it makes it claim to be more prestigeous and better overall than the other schools too. Yes most gradstudents can see the opinion in the rankings, but they basicly market them to handicap children who can't think properly for themselves anyways. If they were marketing 170 lsat scorers with 3.75 GPA and Masters in Marketing degrees, then I'd feel different.They are targeting those who they know will fall for bright colors and flashing lights. AAMPLE just makes it even worse. Just because someone "wants" or even asks for something shouldn't make it legal to give it to them. (volcano insurance in Iowa for the elderly comes to mind as a fair comparison)
IRRX, it seems you enjoy provocation and antagonism.
Quote from: Nova Juris on May 12, 2012, 07:40:26 PMThanks for the link. It applies to a NY school, and Cooley aims it's marketing at those with unquestionably lower levels of education and logic ability (low gpa, low lsat, less than a BA,etc)It seems likes apples to oranges, especially since their ranking system doesn't just talk of employment stats like the NY suit, it makes it claim to be more prestigeous and better overall than the other schools too. Yes most gradstudents can see the opinion in the rankings, but they basicly market them to handicap children who can't think properly for themselves anyways. If they were marketing 170 lsat scorers with 3.75 GPA and Masters in Marketing degrees, then I'd feel different.They are targeting those who they know will fall for bright colors and flashing lights. AAMPLE just makes it even worse. Just because someone "wants" or even asks for something shouldn't make it legal to give it to them. (volcano insurance in Iowa for the elderly comes to mind as a fair comparison)
You are such an elitist dic.k I hope you got a 170 LSAT to put down so many people so unabashedly. None of us can think as "properly" as you. Aren't you the dumbass who called 2/3s of the population morons a few posts back?I hope the system really works and isn't a system based on complete crap. Look up the standard deviations for standardized tests- most have an accuracy of prediction of less than %1. And we all know how much you love the %1, wink wink.
First you put down 2/3s of the population and insinuate anyone who got less than a 170 LSAT is "handicapped".Now you wish to offer them your protection to make things "equal". Are you actually basing this on Mien Kompf? Mein Kampf Seriously?
Whoa, with those options you might consider one of the online law schools. I think the quality is improving and the stigma is slowly disappearing. My wife is going through the process now, and I'm learning a lot along the way. In addition to considering what you want to do long-term, think about the school's reputation in the local community. They say the legal field is small, and boy does my wife have the stories to support that proposition after working as a biglaw paralegal for 6 years.If you go the online route, check out Concord, St. Francis, and ALU.