ABA Journal - Law News Now

Comments

• Report Abuse

1. Posted by c - 1 month, 2 weeks, 2 days, 9 hours, 16 minutes ago

   Great… what an awesome idea.  Let’s let those who get their law degrees online take any bar they want.  If this guy is so successful why couldn’t he get into a normal law school or why not go to night school and get a law degree if you really want to practice elsewhere.

2. Posted by JD - 1 month, 2 weeks, 2 days, 16 minutes ago

   What we do without the law school elitists like “c” above! If the kid from an online law school was successful and studied the same materials that everyone else studied in an in-class setup, why not let him practice law too? Next thing you know, ppl who go to TIer 4 or unranked law schools won’t be worthy enough for “c”. Mitchell took and passed the California bar - one of the hardest bar exams in the country; and he represented himself in this case and did great at oral argument. His online education sure didn’t hold him back in that aspect.

   Kudos to Ross Mitchell for taking the unconventional way and making it work!

3. Posted by Marc J. Randazza - 1 month, 2 weeks, 1 day, 20 hours, 56 minutes ago

   I’m not comfortable with this as a blanket policy—that online law degrees are per se acceptable.  However, if a guy is a) admitted to another bar and b) has practiced competently in that state for four years, I fail to see how it matters where he attended law school.

4. Posted by Supremacy Claus - 1 month, 2 weeks, 1 day, 14 hours, 56 minutes ago

   The Supremacy attended the same school. Ross did well against the hapless, helpless advocate for the Bar. I hope the Bar saved money hiring that poor fellow.

   Concord is different in that the students are old, with established expertise in the widest possible variety of fields. Networking with that student body makes the low tuition well worth it many times over. Go to top ranked schools, the experience of most students is summer work. The majority of Concord grads are too rich to go into law afterward, and are senior to most law faculty and Deans in every conceivable aspect. The tiniest minority need a lawyer job after passing the California Bar. Those choosing to dive into that sewer have done well in the law.

   Ross would be near the top of the class at a top tier law school. In the case of the Supremacy, the part time study on line cost a $million in lost income. The idea of taking 3 years off, and starting as an associate, climbing up the ladder from the bottom of a profession would generate many $millions in losses. The Supremacy loves the lawyer, loves the law, but not that much. And then to join a profession in utter, unremitting failure, out of the question. The Supremacy finds the current practice of law to be appalling, and totally unacceptable. The law needs help, because it is mired in Scholasticism and medieval methodologies.  It is in utter failure in every goal of every law subject. It is in failure but runs government. It causes all social problems including the current economic crisis. Its sole success is lawyer rent seeking. It is spectacularly successful at that. This crisis will generate $hundreds of billions in lawyer make work, all pretextual, all missing the real cause. The lawyer will have caused it. The lawyer will be its sole beneficiary.

5. Posted by df - 1 month, 2 weeks, 19 hours, 24 minutes ago

   Good. I know nothing about Concord, but it’s each state (and D.C., etc.) that deals with admission to practice law, not the ABA; and it’s appropriate to exercise discretion in some instances. This sounds like someone who will be more than competent to practice law—to take an extreme example, they certainly sound more qualified than the lowest-ranked (but still passing) graduates of the “worst” ABA-approved law schools in the nation…

   I’m glad that New York (for instance), still allows for admission under “articles” (one year formal legal study, rest of the time spent studying with an attorney). Very few people use that route or even if they do few manage to pass the bar, but some do, and they seem more than qualified from what I’ve read. I think the ABA Journal had an article a while back profiling a current state supreme court judge (from Vermont or Virginia, I think) who had originally qualified as a lawyer under such provisions.

6. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 2 weeks, 13 hours, 30 minutes ago

   @df - Yes, each state is responsible for setting its own guidelines for bar admission, but if the ABA accredits Concord, it can be said, based on all 50 states’ allowing graduates of ABA-approved schools to take their bar, that the ABA does indeed have some clout.

7. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 2 weeks, 13 hours, 10 minutes ago

   Both legal education and the profession itself are changing rapidly, and at an even more harried pace of late given our economic climate.

   People are thinking more rationally about accumulating hoards of debt for what is no longer a guaranteed job, even for graduates of top-20 schools. The schools themselves are changing their curricula to reflect a greater need for the individual to support him/herself, and more aid is being directed toward those interested in partaking in public interest endeavors.

   As for the profession, more and more responsibility is being delegated (at a savings to the client) to non-lawyer legal staff, including paralegals/legal assistants and legal secretaries. At the same time, malpractice suits are at an all time high, which translates into an inordinate amount of risk for the attorney to burden. As such, there is less and less incentive to join the ranks of this dying profession everyday.

   That the ABA is finally, finally considering schools that offer an aggressive and substantial legal education regardless of whether they are housed in a brick and mortar facility can only be a good thing, provided there continues to remain a high standard of excellence.

   It shouldn’t matter whether a student sits in a classroom or sits at home, so long as the material, the conveyance, and impact on learning thereof are equivalent.

   The problem, of course, lies in the ease and relatively inexpensive nature of setting up any old online facility. Still, there is no reason the ABA cannot evaluate these offerings the same way it does their physical counterparts.

   Concord has gone a long way to set itself apart and easily rivals many schools in the second and third tiers in terms of depth and breadth of content, bar passage rates, faculty experience, and even ability to network—not to mention the fact that it’s thousands of dollars less expensive than conventional schools.

   Where it suffers is in both the ignorant notion of prestige over actual output (I know top-five grads who couldn’t represent themselves pro se if their life depended on it—literally); the false stigma surrounding distance learning in general (for which distance learning itself deserves some of the responsibility); and in terms of inaccessibility to employers—physically speaking.

   For the most part, each of those sufferings equates to a psychological barrier that can be remedied to a large extent via the ABA’s support.

   Again, standards should remain high, even perhaps going to far as to require attachment to an accredited university (Concord is attached to Kaplan), and online schools should indeed be put under the microscope given the lower barriers for entry.

   Regardless, the ABA is going to have to shift its policy sooner or later because this is, by all means, the way of the future.

   And I welcome it.

   Thank you, Ross Mitchell!

8. Posted by willem dedonis - 1 month, 2 weeks, 6 hours, 5 minutes ago

   Great; just what we need; more untrained lawyers!

9. Posted by Marc J. Randazza - 1 month, 2 weeks, 2 hours, 18 minutes ago

   How do you know he is “untrained?”  From the report, it sounds like he has practiced since 2004, which makes him a lot better “trained” than whoever graduated #1 in their class from a so-called top-tier school.

10. Posted by Tier 4 Tearful - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 23 hours, 11 minutes ago

    This article makes me weep!  No longer will (barely) ABA-accredited law school remain at the bottom rung!  FInally, finally, finally….the T14 snobs have a different class of law schools (online) to smother in their elitist, ivory-tower anger.

    Wake up.  It is complete insanity to hold onto the ancient notion that the school you attended or the floor you work on has anything to do with your legal ability.

    Its about guts, tenacity and motivation. 

    This guy had all three.  Good for Mr. Mitchell.

11. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 13 hours, 1 minute ago

    @willem It blows my mind how ignorant your statement is. When I read comments like yours I think, great, just what we need, more uninformed readers—only I forgo the semicolons.

    I commend Mr. Randazza for calling you out on your antiquated line of thinking.

12. Posted by Jessica - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 7 hours, 24 minutes ago

    I also graduated from a Non ABA Approved Law School. I have been admitted to the Bar of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and have just recently approved the federal bar exam. i have been successfully practicing for almost two years. To enlighten “C” I didn’t choose to study on this particular law school for lack of opportunities to attend one that was ABA approved, but because I chose to study here due to it’s different approach to law teaching and practice. It is more socially focused than the mainstream law school with an emphasis on alternative dispute resolution approaches, such as mediation. This does not mean by any chance that we are not good litigators. If we have been admitted to any state and or federal bar, and successfully proven our competence, why not allow us to practice in another state? We are sufficiently limited s it is by not being allowed to work in most federal agencies.

13. Posted by A - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 2 hours, 11 minutes ago

    I’m a member of the bars of CA, NJ, PA, and MA and this really is no big deal.  He’s not going to steal your job at Cravath, so why worry?

14. Posted by JFK - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 2 hours, 3 minutes ago

    I am a graduate of Harvard Law School, and I believe that restricting bar admission to those who attended an ABA accredited school is wrong.  It’s worse than elitist—it has its roots in lawyers trying to restrict the supply of lawyers so that they face less competition.  Besides, why should the accrediting body be the ABA, which, after all, is not much more than a magazine club for a small portion of the lawyers in the country?  If the bar exam is legitimate, what difference does it make wherethe applicant went to law school, or even whether he did?  Plenty of graduates of top law schools are crappy lawyers.

15. Posted by Kevin - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 1 hour, 52 minutes ago

    14 -

    There *needs* to be some restrictions on entry into the profession.  Law school is no longer the bar to entry to the profession that medical school is for doctors.  Anyone can go to law school now, and now anyone does. 

    The result is a market flooded with people who are hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, with a degree from a barely accredited law school slugging it out for low-paying jobs that offer little or no meaningful and fulfilling work.

    Underserved areas continue to be underserved while thousands of unemployed lawyers hover around our major cities like angry vultures.

    We don’t need anymore law schools, we need to trim the current number back to 100 (or the 140 or so schools who claim to be in the top 100).

    And before anyone goes pointing the elitist finger, I went to a TTT.

16. Posted by elitist law - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 1 hour, 50 minutes ago

    We need more lawyers.  Why don’t we let every college have a law school program?

    Why should the ivy league have a monopoly on spewing out robotic clueless lawyers?

17. Posted by CaliGirl - 1 month, 1 week, 6 days, 26 minutes ago

    Anyone who has a JD, no matter if it’s from Stanford or a part-time night school that’s not even accredited by the Cal Bar, can sit for the California Bar Exam.  Anyone.  And there’s no limit on the number of times the exam can be taken. 

    If the state trusts its determination that the rigorous 3-day exam is sufficient to determine someone’s ability to practice, it doesn’t matter where they went to school.  And it’s not even mandatory to get a JD to sit for the exam—one can “sit at the knee” of a judge to study the law for 10 years and then apply for the exam. 

    Why should the ABA have such a chokehold on who’s allowed to take the exam?  Open it up.  Let people who can’t attend an ABA-accredited school for whatever reason - it’s not only grades and LSAT scores, sometimes it’s family or finances - sit for the exam and prove they’re competent to practice law.  Works for California.

18. Posted by pw - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 18 hours, 29 minutes ago

    It’s not being elitist to expect for an attorney to have undergone formal legal training, before representing the interests of persons who rely on his/her expertise.

    I understand that we live in a fast food society, in which impatience rules the day, but there is no on-line substitute for the rigors of being prepared daily to tackle the socratic method.  On-line degrees may work for other fields of employment, but practicing law is a profession, and one that may have dire consequences for its clients.

    What’s next?  Do we want medical schools to start giving out on-line degrees?  I most certainly do not.  There are many people who knock the need for law school beyond the first year, but the attention to detail, that a good law student should learn, and the continued practice (writing, researching and interacting with peers and professors) are unquestionably important skills that all lawyers should master in law school. 

    No on-line leagl program can teach a student the value of his/her interactions with people.  If a person is not committed enough to give a considerable portion of their time to those processes, they should think, seriously, about pursuing alternate careers.

19. Posted by two hats - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 17 hours, 35 minutes ago

    Grads from non-accredited ABA law schools should be required to take a state bar exam. Grads from an accredited ABA law school should be exampt from the bar exam and automatically admitted to practice upon graduation. Otherwise, why the need for accrediation? The law schools could just teach us all how to pass the bar exam instead of having to pay thousands of dollars after graduation for BarBri.

20. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 16 hours, 48 minutes ago

    @pw

    While I agree that it behooves potential clients to expect their attorneys to be fully-qualified, to what extent is the Concord education not “formal,” but for the lack of physical surroundings? Have you yourself evaluated its rigor against that of “traditional” schools? I bring up rigor because I think we all agree it’s the outcome that matters most; and rigor as a means of weeding out those that can and cannot take the pace of legal learning is more than justified as a criteria of formality. On the other hand, I think most would also agree that sitting in an air-conditioned lecture hall with 25-150 other people isn’t nearly as important.

    Further, to what extent do you believe Concord represents our apparent propensity toward a fast-food society? It takes just as long as “traditional” part-time law study (four years), and even requires an additional element in the way of the First Year Law Student Exam (FYLSE, or “baby bar”), which the State of California administers, before a candidate can pass to the second year.

    Finally, to what extent does the Concord process forgo the Socratic method? Indeed interaction, whether synchronous or otherwise, is just as in-depth as that of the brick and mortar equivalent, and might be even more in-depth, as all students are required to participate in order to receive credit. When you’re sitting in the classroom, you’re either called on or not, assuming you don’t volunteer yourself in the first place. As such, the online interaction taking place at Concord might open up possibilities for perspectives otherwise not available in a “traditional” setting.

    Finally, you compare the study of the law to that of medicine. While I understand both are, at times, equally critical to the livelihoods of their constituents, the last time I checked, law requires naught but the examination and output of words on a piece of paper, whereas the study of medicine has a definitive series of physical elements, from simply examining a throat to performing a spinal tap, making it inherently difficult, if not near impossible, to teach certain principles in an online forum. Apples and oranges, while delicious together in a smoothie, are not necessarily comparable otherwise.

    It’s ironic that in a predominantly legal forum such as this one, people choose to argue their positions without having all the facts.

21. Posted by yep - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 15 hours, 1 minute ago

    I disagree with this ruling.

22. Posted by question - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 14 hours, 59 minutes ago

    By the way, what is going on with that class action suit for BarBri.  I took 2 state bar exams in the time frame and am due about $1,200.00.

23. Posted by df - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 11 hours, 18 minutes ago

    For those like #15, sure it may be in our economic interests to reduce the number of people who can be lawyers. But to do so by ABA or legislative or other fiat would be wrongly monopolistic. It’s not a medieval guild. Anyone who is intellectually, ethically, and educationally capable of being a competent lawyer should be allowed to become one without artificial barriers (in my view, anyway, even if it’s contrary to my economic interests).

    From what little I’ve read of this individual and this law school, he seems competent to practice the law, as he has for several years and acting pro se in this matter, as others have noted. Even if he’s the only graduate of this law school who is so capable (doubtful but possible), if Massachusetts considers him reasonably competent to write the state bar exam, I won’t second-guess them.

    There may very well be “too many” law schools and lawyers, though reasonable people may disagree. If so, let market forces deal with it. Most articles/blogs/anecdotes seem to have a lot to say about thinking law was the answer, it would be lucrative, law schools were misleading, etc. Get the truth out there and fewer people will want to become lawyers for the wrong reasons. Don’t get involved in the unAmerican unduly protectionist regulation to limit competition (don’t even get me started on how some states overregulate even “interior designers”, let alone lawyers…).

24. Posted by B. McLeod - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 9 hours, 32 minutes ago

    This one is harder than some other jurisdictions, because it covers Mass. torts.

25. Posted by pw - 1 month, 1 week, 3 days, 3 hours, 13 minutes ago

    Gilbert,

    First, I disagree with your apples and oranges assessment regarding the educatonal environments of law and medicine.  Having many friends who are MDs has given me some insight into the similarities of the legal and medal training.  For example, although the majority of medical students tend to be very bright, many of them have a lot to learn about their bed side manner.  Comparably, many law students also tend to be bright, however, a significant portion of them are ineffective at defusing volatile situations.  Learning that trick of the trade cannot effectively be taught on-line. 

    Next, in my experiences, legal or otherwise, the relationships that a person develops during their training can be invaluable.  For instance, when researching a topic that may not be my forte, I can contact a former classmate who I know has a proven interest in that subject.  I only know about their expertise, because I remember converstaions that we randomly had about the topic in between studying with that person for an exam.

    Finally, true legal analysis requires engaging in substantive conversations.  Anyone off the street can pick up a book and read it repeatedly, but it’ll be very unlikely that they’ll see the full range of material that actually exists between those pages, because they’re not engaging in face-to-face exchanges, which engender emotive responses that are filled with different perspectives.

    We should never forget that the best lawyers are persons who understand that law is about more than what’s simply written in the books; it’s about how we get ideas and concepts reduced to words.  Just take as an example the Constitution and the Declaration of Indepence; those documents resulted from real intercations, which allowed persons to come together for a common purpose.

26. Posted by George Sly - 1 month, 1 week, 1 day, 19 hours, 11 minutes ago

    I have a friend who graduated from law school in England and now practices in New York.  He came to this country because his wife is an American.  My friend practiced in England and was a member of the Middle Temple He can practice in New York but he cannot practice in New Jersey or even sit for the bar because he did not go to an ABA credited Law School.  That is an absurdity. 
    It would seem to me that if you can pass the bar exam, you should be able to practice.  The ABA is a private organization and it should have no control over law school admissions or admissions to the bar.  I am a member of the ABA and I believe it has done good work in many areas but it should not function as a monopoly which usurps the power of the State.

27. Posted by Jim - 1 month, 1 week, 17 hours, 44 minutes ago

    What makes you think the people who atttend Concord couldn’t get into a ABA school? For some of us it was a choice.

28. Posted by ST - 1 month, 6 days, 23 hours, 25 minutes ago

    In our modern email/internet society, the written expression of ideas is again on the rise.  As nice as face-to-face debate is, it is declining in importance.  Any benefit one would get from face to face interaction at brick and mortar law school, if you even accept the premise that such interaction is beneficial and necessary, is also on the decline.

    Online delivery is the future (and arguably the present) of education.  Not every law student needs “bedside manner” training.  Not every lawyer works in a traditional legal environment.  Not every person’s learning or networking ability is bound by the restrictions of time and/or space. 

    Some people just need to be educated on the law itself.  Some people are able to connect with others through electronic means.  And they can do this all without the other nonsense that goes along with gaining the ABA seal of approval.

    Objections to alternative education are anti-competitive and inconsistent with the evolution of both our profession and society in general.  Congrats to Mr. Mitchell on this historic triumph.

29. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 6 days, 18 hours, 51 minutes ago

    @pw

    There are many ways for me to argue your response, including my own experience with med school as compared to law school, my own friends with MDs and JDs, and even building on #28’s sentiment, but it is once again your lack of awareness that makes for the easiest means by which I can prove you simply have no idea what you’re talking about.

    For the second time now you have pointed to direct communication as a barrier, and for the second time you fail to acknowledge that online law school—at least in the Concord sense—actually, factually and aggressively provides greater opportunities for communication that you would otherwise not have, and that includes building on the ability to engage in substantive exchanges.

    Also, you fail to acknowledge that Concord students, too, have access to qualified professors—most of which have actual experience in the practice of law, as opposed to simply that of academia—who can help them understand what lies between the pages of their texts. These students aren’t going it alone. There is real, definitive, synchronous interaction taking place—much of which is, as I’ve mentioned and will mention so many times, MORE in-depth than of brick-and-mortar schools!

    I will give you a fresh, literally minutes-old quote from an instant message conversation I had with a friend who is attending a very prominent law school in Southern California. He is a 2L:
    —————————————————-
    My prompt:
    A**c, do you they teach you how to substantively communicate with clients in your law school? Please answer in as unbiased a manner as you can.

    His response:
    You’re joking, right? They don’t even prepare you to take the bar, and this is supposed to be one of the best schools in the country. I have to pay to take a bar review course afterward.

    Regardless, many of my classmates in the top 5% (I will stay with D****y) will go to huge firms where they will never, ever see clients, just like our experience at DPW.

    As for the majority of LS grads that don’t go to these firms, chief among their complaints is that they came out of it knowing how to pass the bar (following a review class), not knowing how to be lawyers. Many get no OTJ at all and are totally in the dark.
    —————————————————-

    The point I’m trying to make here is you assume that somehow a face-to-face exchange, assuming there is one in the first place for students outside of the top 10% of the class (many of those outside of that rank tend to avoid participation), translates into better, more communicative lawyers, where it has been proven otherwise time and again.

    The online exchange provided at Concord, which I have gone out of my way to sample, research and understand (so that I have all the facts before passing judgment), is such that EVERYONE participates (and is required to do so). Also, in interviewing current students and grads, one of the most commonly stated criticisms of the school is that students learn way more law than they “need” to. In other words, the school overcompensates for its reputation by teaching its students more than they would have learned at a brick-and-mortar facility, ABA or otherwise.

    THAT is what the Massachusetts Bar interpreted as sufficient rigor upon its investigation of the Concord curriculum, which it also determined was substantively similar to that which was being taught at ABA schools.

    I’m never going to ultimately discount that there is a difference between face-to-face and online communications is most realms because though you or I may not be able to place a finger on it, there is one. (Still, we cannot ignore the change in how we communicate in these modern times—thank you #28.)

    What I will say is that in real, substantive online exchanges where people have the time and the facility, you end up with better thought-out, more in-depth responses without the usual self-consciousness that comes with being intimidated by your surroundings.

    As such, I contend that with respect to law school, substantive conversation is at its BEST in an online forum.

    (Continued in next comment post.)

30. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 6 days, 18 hours, 51 minutes ago

    @pw cont’d:

    Also, just as an aside with respect to the similarities you mention between law school and medical school, indeed there are many—and that’s on purpose. If you read about the history of legal education you realize that the legal profession sought to reward its students with the same (so they thought) prestige as the medical profession. This is why upon graduation a doctor of jurisprudence is granted (after only three years), where it used to be a masters. It also explains why people get their J.D. before they get their LL.M.

    People in medical school could probably do their academic training in an online forum and do it very successfully. The hands-on, however, will have to be in a physical setting.

    Either way—though many medical schools are making an aggressive push to change this—bedside manner is not taught in the classroom (how can it be—you really think they’re going to role play?), it’s acquired during required rotations and clinics (another hands-on aspect), as well as through honing natural talent.

    They will not, and never will be one and the same, pw, and they shouldn’t be treated as such. If they were, they would be taught in the same classrooms with the same professors and have the same governing bodies providing oversight.

    One lends itself well to online learning, the other does not.

    Again, apples to oranges.

31. Posted by KK - 1 month, 6 days, 13 hours, 26 minutes ago

    A couple thoughts.  By way of disclosure, I first graduated from a non-ABA online school, practiced in California for three years, and then attended and graduated from a Tier 1 ABA school in order to practice in other jurisdictions.  Both times I graduated #1 in my class.  In comparing the education I received at the respective schools, the non-ABA school provided a legal education very comparable if not equal to the ABA school.  And tuition was only $3,000 per year vs. $28,000 (out of state) at the ABA school.  Definitely made more economical sense.  It seems to me that many of the ABA’s accrediting standards have more to do with prestige and $$$ than quality legal education.  For example, how many graduating lawyers of the current generation actually use hard copy books for legal research?  Yet the ABA’s accreditation standards impose certain minimum library requirements that make it difficult for startup schools.  The ABA’s standards need to be modernized to reflect not only current realities but also to include alternative forms of legal education.  They certainly shouldn’t be used (as it appears they are) to squelch competition.  From an economic standpoint, such measures can only further drive up the escalating costs of legal education.  I find it ironic that the legal community often bemoans the lack of lawyers in full-time public service due to the costs of their degrees, yet the ABA’s protectionist policies only exacerbate this problem.

    Second, in response to #25, I found that I am much closer to my non-ABA school classmates than my ABA classmates.  Just because learning and discussion takes place online doesn’t mean you can’t form strong relationships in those fora.  Moreover, we created opportunities for face-to-face contact, such as regional study groups, FYLSX study groups, and bar prep groups.  Finally, my non-ABA classmate network extends nationwide rather than regionally, which makes finding local counsel rather convenient for my clients.

32. Posted by Appellate Clerk - 1 month, 6 days, 12 hours, 23 minutes ago

    Gilbert,

    I take issue with your various comments because they seem to suggest that non-online schools are inferior to online schools (specifically Concord).  I somehow suspect you will be lucky to end up working for me as a paralegal.

33. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 6 days, 10 hours, 34 minutes ago

    @Appellate Clerk

    You would be lucky to have me as a paralegal because then I could teach you how to argue the facts as opposed to simply perpetuating elitist nonsense.

    My point across the several comments I have made in reference to this article is that there really isn’t any substantive difference between a quality online education and one that comes from sitting in a classroom, legal or otherwise.

    At the same time, I’m not really worried. Eventually, more progressive forms of learning and certification will become the norm in lieu of the antiquated and costly system we have now.

    If you really are an appellate clerk, it’s likely you did very well in your law school, and you should certainly be commended for that. Yet somehow, given the substance (or lack thereof) of your commentary, I would venture to guess that Mr. Mitchell would make a fool of you in any legal forum.

    I simply cannot wait.

34. Posted by Appellate Clerk - 1 month, 6 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes ago

    Gilbert,

    Although I am not usually one to take this kind of risk, you have yourself a deal.  I will give you a job as my paralegal.  The pay is $36,400 a year with benefits (no dental).  I expect you to start at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, December 15.  Please email me at managingpartner@jeffersonlaw.com for further details. 

    Please, please do not let me down.  I am taking a big chance on you.  If you do well, maybe in five or ten years I will pay your tuition for a real law school.

35. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 6 days, 5 hours, 43 minutes ago

    For those that don’t already know (assuming you care), Appellate Clerk is making a cheaplawyers.com joke.

    Cute.

    Even cuter is the pissing contest which I refuse to partake in since it only serves to cheapen the profession in ways not even online law school apparently can.

    At the same time, I’m indebted to our good friend, Appellate Clerk. Clearly I lack the brevity required to so eloquently convey my message in the way he (or she) has.

    Always a pleasure. Best of luck.

36. Posted by I care - 1 month, 5 days, 23 hours, 35 minutes ago

    @Gilbert,

    It is apparent to all readers that you have an inferiority complex because of the law school you attended.  You do not need to be ashamed.  Take the paralegal job.  It sounds like a nice fit for you.

37. Posted by pw - 1 month, 5 days, 17 hours, 26 minutes ago

    Gilbert, Gilbert, Gilbert,

    Obviously, there is a disconnect which you are failing to grasp from my writings, so let me try to clear up your confusion.  In a “real” law school setting students partake in Trial Advocacy, Appellate Advocacy and Moot Court.  In addition to the day-to-day law school setting, these are the experiences that help prepare law students to become lawyers.

    There is NO on-line setting that can prepare a lawyer to answer questions from a hot bench.  There is NO on-line setting that prepares an attorney to “face” his peers while presenting arguments.  There is NO on-line setting that allows students to build their confidence by speaking in front of a lecture hall filled with students and impatient professors. 

    These experiences are important because lawyers run into similar situations in actual courtrooms, and with actual clients. 

    On a side note, I’ve had the pleasure (I use that term loosely) to meet some of the “on-line lawyers,” and let’s just say I was thoroughly unimpressed.  With all of the extra requirements that on-line law schools must adhere to, why are their bar admissions numbers so low?

    As my mother’s always told me “the proof is in the pudding.”

38. Posted by I Care Too - 1 month, 5 days, 10 hours, 42 minutes ago

    Gilbert,

    There is a word in the legal profession that we use to describe people like Appellate Clerk and though it lacks your eloquence I think it’s quite fitting: a**hole. People like him, no matter where they graduated from, never last very long even though they think they do, whereas people like you are all too rare. I can tell you are young. You should continue to hone that fire. 

    By way of my own disclosure, I am a 1984 graduate of what is widely considered, depending in who you’re asking, to be the top law school in the country. Though I still practice full time, I also happen to teach at an online-based non-ABA law school. In fact, as PW above might like to know, I focus on areas of trail and appellate advocacy, as well as moot court, all of which I can assure you are just as intense as that of a “real” school.

    The real-time virtualization (video and audio) techniques are extremely effective in duplicating the effort, which I have been party to at every level. Also, while there is currently no online setting that can duplicate speaking in a lecture hall, not only is the virtual experience very close, but it also teaches a skill which is becoming more and more valuable every day.

    By the way, PW, bar passage rates at my school (about 45% of first time takers) are equivalent to those of the majority of tier three schools and many in the first tier so I’m not quite sure what you’re referring to. 

    -WR

39. Posted by Appellate Clerk - 1 month, 5 days, 10 hours, 22 minutes ago

    I Care Too,

    You have a lot of spunk for an old-timer.  If you are interested in a position as a paralegal as well, I am sure I can find some work for you.  Given your experience, how does $46,350 sound (no benefits)?  I can assure you this is a step up from your professorship in the land of make believe.

40. Posted by pw - 1 month, 4 days, 22 hours, 1 minute ago

    WR, a.k.a. I Care Too,

    If you’re a law professor at an on-line school, I rest my case regarding the difference in education that a traditional legal environment provides in contrast to an on-line school.  Clearly, your writing and analytical ability are inferior to the vast majority of law professors that you find at “real” law schools.  For example, what law professor defends an abysmal bar passage record by comparing it to other poor producing schools?  Brilliant!

41. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 4 days, 18 hours, 51 minutes ago

    @pw:

    I think that the professor was suggesting was that the rates were comparable to “real” schools, which your post falsely seemed to argue wasn’t nearly the case. Further, 45% isn’t all that bad and in fact, with respect to Concord at least, you see the same trend: those with 3.0 GPAs and above enjoy significantly higher passage rates (approximately 65%).

    What I mean to say is that, like any school, those that apply themselves more do better; and I will concede that those attending online law school in the first place might be more predisposed toward extracurricular activities (family, work, etc.) than those students who are able to apply themselves full-time (part-time rates and brick-and-mortar schools are always lower, too). In other words, where there is emphasis on passage (the 3.0s), you get a good rate; where there isn’t, the rate is not so great.

    That said, I’d like to ask your genuine opinion on hybrid models of education. What if you had a brick-and-mortar school, with the ABA’s blessing, offering a significant portion of its curriculum online, and emphasizing those aspects which require a more personal setting (TA, MC, etc.) as part of the in-house study?

    There obviously has to be some balance at some point in the future. For all your genuinely strong arguments, you simply cannot stop progress. So instead of us fighting over why it will/won’t work, let’s talk about some of the best ways to make it work.

    @WR:

    Thanks for your kind words.

42. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 4 days, 18 hours, 49 minutes ago

    @pw:

    I should clarify that 45% “isn’t all that bad” for those taking the California Bar Exam, which is widely considered to be the most difficult in the country.

43. Posted by Jim - 1 month, 4 days, 12 hours, 50 minutes ago

    What should the role of the ABA be here? Set a minimum education standard or try to limit the number of people with the ABA seal of approval?

44. Posted by Gilbert Grape - 1 month, 4 days, 11 hours, 18 minutes ago

    What should the role of this message be?  To bash Jim for being an idiot or to belittle Gilbert for wasting money on an online law degree?

45. Posted by Jim - 1 month, 3 days, 21 hours, 6 minutes ago

    Well, Either they should cut 100 schools from the ABA list or let schools that provide a equal or better quality education the oppurtunity to be ABA members.

46. Posted by pw - 1 month, 3 days, 21 hours, 4 minutes ago

    Gilbert,

    First, let me start out by saying that I appreciate the fact that you’ve maintained your professionalism throughout our exchanges on this blog.  As I’m sure you have, I’ve had the unfortunate pleasure to witness the degradation that ensues in many of these conversations.

    As for tackling the issue of future legal study, I agree that the traditional law school environment will need to be modified.  Although I don’t agree with on-line teaching for most legal subjects, I like the idea of 60% in-class learning coupled with 40% empirical study.  For example, after the first year of traditional legal study, students should take two or three classes per semester, and during each of those semesters they should work for some legal entity for 25-30 hours per week, unpaid.

    In my opinion, gaining experience under a practitioner while hitting the books would provide the best learning experience.  Students would be able to apply their knowledge to real legal work.

47. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 3 days, 20 hours, 36 minutes ago

    @Gilbert Grape

    I never said I graduated from an online law school, or any school for that matter. I left that for the boards to assume.

48. Posted by Gilbert - 1 month, 3 days, 20 hours, 15 minutes ago

    @pw

    Though we may differ on which, if any, classes are applicable to online study, I am a huge, huge fan of your system, which is actually gaining popularity (in clinical form) at schools such as UCLA—though participation is largely optional. (Still, there is a huge waiting list.)

    Nobody can ever, ever argue in a meaningful way against the merits of a theory-based approach combined with the acquisition of practical, meaningful experience.

    I can only hope that the ABA recognizes this and broadens its evaluation to include as a significant portion this criteria, as opposed, as one commenter quipped above, the size of a school’s library.

    I admit the United States is not ready for the transition to fully online learning. In general, we’re slow to change, but in this case, given the stakes involved in the profession in question, that’s okay. That we take the time to do it right is most important.

    In envision a school—a reputable school—introducing a method of study that combines the benefits of distance learning where possible with the proven efficacy of physical interaction. Perhaps this program could take place in the second year and be available to students who prove to be exemplary learners during their 1L year, which is largely theoretical no matter what school you attend (many I know simply buy a commercial outline and rarely attend class since they can get the audio or video—depending on the school—of it at will).

    Slowly but surely distance study will become more prevalent, particularly as we move through the generations and perceptions of online study change. Until then, however, the above changes are a legitimate means of introducing this form of study into the legal profession.

    Also, pw, regarding keeping it professional, that was my goal from the beginning. There are always people out there who choose to leave a negative mark on what should generally be considered a positive exchange between thoughtful minds.

    This is, after all, the Internet…