Schools with lousy web sites make me hesitate...

[cyberrev]

i thought that cleveland state, ohio northern, and arkansas (little rock) are pretty bad as well.

i thought it was a bad time of the year for arkansas to be redesigning their web site.  however, admissions has been great in quickly responding to any questions.

[kree]

i'm not a web design expert, but if a school looks like it hasn't put enough time and effort into its website, i count it out. then again, those schools with crappy websites probably have other problems too

[thelynifer]

U. of Richmond Web-site is questionable.  There is little to no information on it.  Actually now that I think about it, every school I'm applying to (exception of Mizzou) has a questionable Web-site.  Probably not a good sign.

I was thinking the same thing. Very uninformative.

EDIT: UMD's is probably the best I've seen. It's not pretty but it tells you just about everything you'd wanna know.
http://www.law.umaryland.edu/

[Lionel Hutz]

It doesn't seem to have much correlation to the school's quality: NY Law has the best site of the schools I applied to.

I found W&M's site to be particularly poor, but except for an exception here or there, I thought that the sites generally ranged from substandard to average.

[ZinnMaster]

The University of Pittsburgh, while not a bad website, does lack a lot of information that would really look good to a prospective student. I was told several things during the tour and while meeting with faculty, that made me thing, "huh, now why isn't that on the website?" This goes for brochures as well, had I simply looked at a website and a brochure for each school, my feelings about the respective schools would be a lot different. It seems like such a simple and beneficial tool for a school to use.

On a side note, Beckett, I just posted a link for the LSD fantasy baseball league in the "mlb..." thread. Check it out if you are interested.

[laurrk]

The Case website leaves a lot to be desired. They have (or at least used to have) a lot of outdated info.

[Monarch heels]

Sounds like a lot of law schools neglect their web sites.  Personally, I think it is a generation gap.  The people in charge don't realize how much we rely on the sites for information. 

Considering how cheap it is to put information on a web site compared to printing and postage for mass mailers, you'd think schools would use their sites more effectively.

oh, and uh...yeah, I am a web designer, so I might be a little picky. 

[99redballoons]

It seems a little silly that many of them don't realize how much information prospective students get from their sites, especially when they encourage you to use the web to apply. (and it's even odder when places like Cornell, which I think has an unattractive site, have great print materials)

[juliemccoy]

I can tell you that as a marketing professional, it doesn't matter how good of a creative force you have behind your materials. You can make a ton of money, have a great name and reputation, and some terribly ugly marketing collateral.Often the web master is not the same person designing the direct mail pieces. Sometimes it takes a while for the two to synch up. The only benefit to be gained by not applying to schools with sub-par websites is that you are opening up the applications pool for the rest of us who are looking for more substantative reasons to choose a law school than the look and feel of a web site! I can understand your reservation if the marketing materials don't look professional, but consider that the academics and job placement are the only considerations. The marketing staff and designers employed by the law school aren't signining off on your accept/deny for admissions.

[juliemccoy]

All the more reason to talk to recent students and alumni, visit the school and do actual research on career services and job placement!