Abraham Lincoln University, School of Law

[jack24]

I'm sure you are right that there are a combination of factors.  Still, I think there is probably a tipping point somewhere.   I'm sure some candidates simply cannot relocate to attend a T4 school, so they "attend" a distance learning school, but I imagine many of those students at a DL school performed poorly on the LSAT.

It's been a while since I looked, but I think even Cal Western students have an average LSAT of over 150.   In my state, I don't think you have to be that smart to pass the bar, so I can't imagine someone who gets 165 on the LSAT has a much better chance of passing the bar than someone who scored 155.  There must be a tipping point though.

Total assumption here, but in a state with a bar passage rate of 85%, you probably see something like this

170+ =99% pass
165-170 = 92% pass
160-170 = 88%
155-160 = 85%
150-165 =  82%
145-150 = 65%
140-145 = 40 %
Under 140 = 18%

LSAC says that LSAT and UGPA are the strongest indicators of bar performance  http://www.unc.edu/edp/pdf/NLBPS.pdf

[legend]

Probably the more important factor for bar passage from an online learning school is each individuals learning style. I personally tried to do online school for a semester for a language class and I simply did not have the discipline for it. I was getting up every 10 minutes for a break, walking outside, and with that study regime you can imagine how well I did in the course. 

 Thankfully this was after law school so my UGPA was not affected, but I imagine it is difficult for most people to handle online school.  I was a solid undergrad student, law student, etc, but having the ability to just click and come back to it later resulted in me saying I will do it later every single day as it compiled and then it became insurmountable. Furthermore, the substance of that course was nowhere near as difficult as law school and I am certain I would not have made it past first year at online law school.

However, there are plenty of people that can handle online schooling and it is more related to the individual than anything to do with LSAT/GPA. This is something that each individually considering online school needs to figure out for themselves. Whether or not you could handle online schooling is a question your better served to answer than any anonymous poster on this site.

In my anonymous internet poster opinion if you can handle online school and pass the California bar there will be some opportunity down the road. However, the statistics do not lie and it is my estimation these distance schools teach you the same substantive law, but most people cannot handle online school and this is why the passage rates are so abysmal.

This is merely an opinion I could be 100% wrong, but it is certainly something worth thinking about for anyone considering enrolling in an online law school.

[Maintain FL 350]

I think that all of the commentary here is correct in one way or another, and I definitely agree with Legend's comments regarding online classes. I've even had a difficult time with BARBRI's online component compared to actual class attendance. I tend to procrastinate (I'm doing it right now!), but others are very disciplined and might do fine in an online learning enviroment.

At the end of the day, however, you can't escape the objectively verifiable numbers. ALUSL's first time bar pass rate for the July 2010 CA bar was seven percent. Even if we accept that the problem is that online learning is just not for everyone, then we'd have to accept that it's apparently not for the vast majority of law students. I'm not a snob about law school rankings or even accreditation, far from it, in fact. But numbers like that indicate a serious problem with the online model, whatever the cause.

Not every class at every online school has such low numbers, at least not consistently. Concord and ALUSL itself had other classes listed on Calbar with 35% pass rates. The rates are inconsistent and the class sizes are very small, however, which to me indicates a problem. Keep in mind that these bar pass rates are after a large number of students have already been weeded out by the FYLSE. If these schools would clearly display their FYLSE and bar pass rates on their websites, I'd be a little less critical.

[jack24]

I still can't believe that there is a problem with the model.    If students who did well in undergrad and scored in the top 1/3 on the LSAT went to online school, I"m sure the bar passage would be higher. 

I personally believe that the brick and mortar education I got was horrible.  It was so focused on theory and we wasted an incredible amount of time.  I'm fine with such academic exercises, but three years was too much.  I relocated after graduation, and I would have benefited greatly had I been allowed to relocate during my third year and take online classes to finish up.   It's hard to stay disciplined, but I had trouble with that during law school.  I got an A in media law one semester and I didn't buy the book or take notes.  I spent the whole time writing my law review note.  Maybe I got lucky, maybe the subject clicked, or maybe my studying was just far more efficient.

 Maybe online education isn't the answer, but law school tuition is out of control, and I think it would be terrible if employers and the ABA failed to see it's benefits because online schools are full of poor performers.

[Cher1300]

I have to agree with everything that has been said.  Although some say the socratic method is antiquated, I think it keeps you on your toes - especially your first year.  There's nothing like the humiliation of not being prepared when called upon to discuss why someone was not considered a public figure in a defamation case, etc. Or if you are struggling for the right answer while everyone sits quietly awaiting your response.  The interaction is helpful because, at least for me, I learned from students who were wrong about certain issues just as much as I learned from the students who were spot on with them.  B&M schools also allow interaction iwth your professors to go over practice exams.  In an on-line school, that type of interaction just isn't available.   

I attend a tier 4 in California.  While there is certainly some truth to LSAT/UGPA in relation to law school success, the ones that aren't cut out for law school will be weeded out after their first year anyway.  The mottos at most tier fours are "easy to get in, hard to graduate from..."  So far, my experience has been that many of the top students in my class weren't necessarily the smartest, but they worked really hard.   Would they have this type of sucess at Yale?  Maybe not, but who knows for sure.

The LSAT is a standardized test that can be mastered with some practice or courses.   Law school exams test your actual knowledge of a subject.  The bar exam does also.   I'm not sure how online schools test their students, but that could also be a big issue.   Most B&M's have closed book, timed exams similar to the bar.  Does anyone know how online schools test for finals?   I've only heard of students flying out to take the FYLSE or Bar Exam.  So if the students are tested at home and allowed to use notes, that could be a big reason.

[jack24]

The LSAT isn't mastered by many.  Practice courses allow you to develop strategies and help you improve your score to some extent, but it's not as if everyone who works hard and takes a practice course or two gets the score they want.

I'm not saying intelligence is the only factor in determining law school success, but it helps. 
When it comes to law school success, I'd take someone with a fantastic memory, fantastic analytical brain, and decent work ethic over someone with a decent memory, decent analytical brain, and fantastic memory any day of the week.

Work ethic is very important, especially when it comes to being a good lawyer, but there are diminishing returns in law school.  While 80 hours studying for civ pro is far better than 40, 300 hours provides little added benefit over 150 hours.

Law school success depends on your ability to identify the relevant facts, recall and identify all relevant black letter law (with a little dicta) and then apply the law to the facts in a way similar to what your professor would do.

The best lawyers have a good idea of where to find the relevant law, but they have absolute command over the facts.  60% of the job of a litigator deals with facts.  Five percent of your time is spent analyzing the law, and the rest is analysis and personality. 

Law school makes it seem like you are going to spend hours in libraries and online trying to find that one case out there that wins the day.   But in most states, you find the relevant statute, quickly digest the rules in all the cases that cite the statute, and then you try to win the fact war.

My point is that the current model for law schools does a poor job of preparing students to be lawyers.  Yes, it provides valuable training in some areas, but three years are two too many.  The whole "professor interaction" and "feedback" argument simply didn't apply to me.  I found great internships and got legal training on the job.  I learned the material on my own and I did well.  I never reviewed my notes after the first semester and I never read a textbook after the first year (with the exception of tax law classes).  Maybe online education has limits, but B&M education has limits as well.  If the online schools are honest about the bar passage rates and they have qualified professors, I think it's a joke that a graduate can't take the bar exam.  My ABA approved school allowed people to be absentee students.  Nobody cared.

[calvinexpress]

Any opinions on ALUSL? I understand they were CHEA accredited last year. As a result I heard they will start offering Federal Student Loans to their law student sometime later this year.

They don't allow students with 60 college credits any longer(Since January 2012). A student must have a bachelors degree or higher to attend, the same as Concord.