Anonymous Law Prof Adds to Law School "Scam" Controversy

Roger_Dooley · 08-09-2011, 02:17 PM

An first-tier law school professor is coming clean on law schools, albeit anonymously:

Quote:

"I can no longer ignore that, for a very large proportion of my students, law school has become something very much like a scam," says the introductory post of the blog, Inside the Law School Scam. "Yet there is no such thing as a 'law school' that scams its students -- law schools are abstract social institutions, not concrete moral agents. When people say 'law school is a scam,' what that really means, at the level of actual moral responsibility, is that law professors are scamming their students."

The professor has gone on in subsequent posts to describe his law faculty colleagues as overpaid, and as inadequate teachers.

News: Hostile Witness - Inside Higher Ed

floridadad55 · 08-09-2011, 02:18 PM

It is a scam, in that there are so many lawyers out there that it is foolish to go to Law School, especially one that is not highly ranked.

People who go to law school are ignorant of the true state of affairs, and have been watching too many TV shows.

Roger_Dooley · 08-09-2011, 02:27 PM

Well, I think some of the complaints about overpaid profs with light teaching loads apply to many disciplines. But the crux of the scam argument is whether law schools disclose to applicants their recent placement history, average salaries, percent of grads finding law firm jobs, etc. If you are pursuing a law degree for personal growth or for career development in your current (non-law) field, the fact that many grads won't find the jobs they expect is irrelevant. On the other hand, if you are studying law to enjoy a lucrative career with an established law firm, you need to know the real facts.

I wonder if the situation is analogous to younger HS athletes that plan on a full ride to a good college followed by a pro career, never actually doing the math to realize that the chances of those things happening are extremely low. I.e., optimistic law school matriculants assume they'll be one of the successful ones, regardless of the odds.

broken_symlink · 08-09-2011, 03:45 PM

I've always wondered this, but do you need to actually go to law school to take the bar exam?

smorgasbord · 08-09-2011, 03:59 PM

Quote:

I've always wondered this, but do you need to actually go to law school to take the bar exam?

You do. Some states (like Virginia) will allow you to take the bar, but only after 7 years work in a county court house or a similar setting. I'm not sure if it's still done this way, though.

DC is one of the jurisdictions where non-lawyers can be law partners, but you can't really have a true, professional law career without a JD/LL.M most places.

mommusic · 08-09-2011, 04:14 PM

I was wondering how this differs from kids who major in say, musical theater, and don't get a job in their field because it's too crowded and they're not good enough.

The difference is, people going to GRADUATE school (i.e. specializing) actually expect to get a job in their field. At the undergraduate level, there is some realization that in a competitive field, they may not get the job, but they go ahead and get the degree anyway because they want it so badly.

LakeWashington · 08-09-2011, 04:57 PM

The cold hard facts of employment for the vast majority of law grads is no secret. And the misery of law employment has been discussed in seminars and forums for years. In law, only grads at the top of their class get the most lucrative law firm jobs. Many bright JDs who had merely good grades end up working for not much more than the minimum wage in their first job. At top it off with the fact that lawyering is still quite a clubby profession, where school ties and interpersonal relationships still carry much weight. Sadly it's these circumstances that often make female attorneys sour on big law firm practices, where the senior partners ocassionally frown at young associates who clamor for a family life and time outside of the practice. Most law graduates are women.

Corbett · 08-09-2011, 05:56 PM

Quote:

I've always wondered this, but do you need to actually go to law school to take the bar exam?

There are some half-dozen states where you can still qualify for the bar exam after several years of "apprenticeship" with a practicing attorney or judge. This was common practice for lawyers in the 19th and early 20th centuries. But it's very rare today, even in states where it is theoretically possible.

Perhaps the best known present-day example is Justice Marilyn Skoglund of the Vermont Supreme Court. She qualified for the Vermont Bar by working in the State Attorney General's office, without ever attending law school.

Corbett · 08-09-2011, 06:06 PM

Another example: you don't need to go to law school to take the federal "Patent Bar" exam, which allows you to practice before the US Patent & Trademark Office. You do need to have an acceptable science or engineering background. A non-lawyer who passes the patent bar gets the title of "patent agent" (as opposed to "patent attorney").

Patent agents do work on intellectual property issues, but their powers are much more limited than those of patent attorneys. A patent agent can only address issues directly involving the USPTO, and otherwise has no standing in federal or state courts.

caddis · 08-09-2011, 06:09 PM

There is much more to the legal profession than big firm practice. I have been practicing law for more than 30 years - never in a big firm. There are many lawyers whose whole career is spent in government: federal, state and local, where they make a reasonable living working reasonable hours. Many others practice in small firms or solo, where one's business/marketing skills are at least as important as legal skills. Solo and small firms can be very, very tough financially for lawyers who lack business skills, but they can also be rewarding places to practice, and, for a few, quite lucrative. Having said all this, if a law school markets itself as a gateway to wealth and status, it is scamming its prospects. As other posters have said, big law dollars are only for a few who have to work very hard and sacrifice much to get them. And, with the present lack of loyalty among law firm partners, one can slave for years enriching the bankruptcy partners only for those same partners to ditch the firm for greener pastures when bankruptcy lawyers become a hot commodity. Caveat emptor, potential law students, caveat emptor.

broken_symlink · 08-09-2011, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Another example: you don't need to go to law school to take the federal "Patent Bar" exam, which allows you to practice before the US Patent & Trademark Office. You do need to have an acceptable science or engineering background. A non-lawyer who passes the patent bar gets the title of "patent agent" (as opposed to "patent attorney").

Patent agents do work on intellectual property issues, but their powers are much more limited than those of patent attorneys. A patent agent can only address issues directly involving the USPTO, and otherwise has no standing in federal or state courts.

I know about the patent agent stuff. I've actually looked into it myself. The exam looks very difficult.

alwaysamom · 08-09-2011, 08:20 PM

Quote:

The cold hard facts of employment for the vast majority of law grads is no secret. And the misery of law employment has been discussed in seminars and forums for years.

This bears repeating. The current state of the legal community is no secret. Anyone who is making the decision and the investment to attend law school should be researching the profession and the potential for employment opportunities. Personal responsibility, people.

ALF · 08-09-2011, 08:29 PM

I have such a negative visceral reaction to the word, 'scam', which too often is used as a hysterical hyperbolic reaction by those who feel they did not get what they were expecting. Too many people are accusing law schools, colleges and education in general as, 'scammers'. Where do you see law schools promising lucrative careers to all graduates, as partners in big-time law firms? They don't. So, who's fault is it when a student graduates with a J.D. and can't find a high-paying job? I know next to nothing about the legal profession, but any fool who reads a paper can tell you that there is an oversupply of attorneys out there. So, if you think you have what it takes, go ahead and go to law school, but don't complain you got scammed if your dreams are not realized.

kindaslick89 · 08-09-2011, 10:29 PM

People should be realistic when thinking about law school. If you want the BigLaw job and 160k out of law school, you probably have to go to a T14 school and do pretty darn well. If you do not care to be in BigLaw, there are plenty of other oppurtunities in government, the public sector, and in local environments. If you can go to decent law school and not bear the complete burden of 100k+ debt, it is probably well worth it. If you can only get into a tier 3 or tier 4 school, and anticipate graduating with a plethora of debt, it might not be worth the investment (if you think it is, then prepare to make sacrifices for a good while).

BUBailey · 08-10-2011, 02:04 AM

There is also plenty of evidence (from, for example, on surveys given before the LSAT) that indicate that students don't think they will be in the percentage of students who can't find jobs. Most students entering law school are aware that the profession is in a downturn, but they simply don't care.

That said, some practices of law schools in reporting their statistics do smack of "scam." Law schools that hire recent graduates at temp jobs around February when they need to report their numbers just so they can claim a 99% employment rate are not being honest.