Sunday, August 17, 2014

Support Law School Transparency.

Is that lighter defective? Is that glittering diamond really just cheap junk? Will that filler tube spring a leak? Is that toilet prone to clog? Absent disclosure of clear and accurate consumer protection info, you might not find out until it is too late. 

The small nonprofit Law School Transparency has done invaluable work in monitoring law schools, formulating proposals for accountability, and following through with effective lobbying. I believe that Law School Transparency was the prime mover behind revised ABA Standard 509, the most important law school reform to date, which forced accredited law schools to survey their recent grads and provide segmented employment data. As well, the Law School Transparency website is a treasure trove of well-organized data as to the cost and performance of each and every ABA-accredited law school. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_School_Transparency

http://www.lstscorereports.com

Law School Transparency is doing a fundraiser, and I encourage readers to throw a few tax-deductible bucks their way if possible. Think of it as a payment in advance for the joyous spectacle that transparency plus scamblogging may bring about within a few years-- when scores of law schools will be forced to shut down or radically change their business model because they are no longer able to sucker a sufficient number of naive kids out of a sufficient amount money to maintain the status quo. 

https://fundrazr.com/campaigns/1p3lb/ab/e3Z2ff

17 comments:

  1. I send them $5 every so often.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe law schools are still cooking the 509, but I appreciate Law School Transparency's work and noble mission.

    ReplyDelete
  3. if John Oliver can do this segment for the payday loans industry, he can do this for the TTT LSs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDylgzybWAw

    ReplyDelete
  4. I remember when Steve Diamond, in a near-psychotic fit of fear, projection and greed-induced hysteria, compared LST to the Mafia. I beg to differ after the fact. LST survives on tax-deductible contributions, which few if any law schools are able to do.

    Now if LST was trying to profit by pimping federal aid programs, prostituting a once-noble profession, and stealthily inducing vulnerable minorities to sign unconscionable contracts, then it could properly be compared to the Mafia. Some would even compare it to Santa Clara University, where Diamond maintains an office. However, no such comparisons are necessary, since LST survives on tax-deductible contributions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Mafia?! What? It merely presents publicly available data. How could that be improper?

      Law-skule touts will stop at nothing.

      Old Guy

      Delete
    2. Guys like Steve Diamond are scared about having to (1) actually work for a living for (2) a reduced wage, so unfortunately they will say and do anything to avoid it. Exposing the truth and demanding accountability takes a back seat in that case.

      Delete
    3. Especially the profs and deans from the real bottom feeders - schools which charge near-Harvard prices, while delivering results which are closer to the Acme School of Truck Driving, Beauty and Door to Door Sales.

      Delete
    4. Good point, Barry.

      LST is helping to make the case for very sharp price differentiation within the law school industry. Steve Diamond draws his paycheck from young people who can't tell the difference. between Yale and Santa Clara. Brian Leiter's students hope to draw paychecks from other young people who can't tell the difference. With so many false entitlements at stake, of course a few malignant professors are going to fight transparency and law school reform. Take it for what it's worth.

      Delete
  5. If I recall correctly, LST was offering to certify a school as reporting honestly if:

    (a) It allowed LST personnel to audit its statistics; and

    (b) It paid a fee of a few thousand dollars.

    That few thousand dollars is nothing compared to what schools have to pay to get accredited, but Diamond claimed that it constituted protection money. That's kind of funny, considering that the worst that could happen to a non-participating school would be to have its public statistics reported accurately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Protection money", my ass! He knows that his skule would be exposed in a proper audit, so he's trying to discredit the auditors. Bastard.

      Old Guy

      Delete
  6. well it costs money to perform an audit. How else would LST be able to verify the figures? Does he expect that accountants would do this for free?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think this reflects the self-serving, status-seeking ideology of many law professors.
      They're trying to impose an academic hierarchy on the real world. Under current conditions, they're able to get law students to do lots of things for free, which they see as one of those inherent perks of professorship. When these professors encounter normal people, they think to themselves that they're talking to serfs of the most degraded kind, people who aren't even law students. So of course these peasants will do things for free. They're not doing important academic research protected by the First Amendment, so they don't deserve any funding at all.

      In reality, LST is doing some great work, and they deserve a modest tax-deductible contribution from anyone who agrees with their goals and can afford to send a few bucks their way. But please, don't go into debt to support LST. They have their own standards.

      Delete
  7. Hang down your head, Tom Cooley;
    Scamsters, you cheat and lie.
    Hang down your head, Tom Cooley:
    Law skule's about to die.

    http://www.lansingcitypulse.com/lansing/article-10487-cooley-right-sizing.html

    Old Guy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL LOL

      That Cooley story is what we've all been waiting for. Scambloggers. step up and take your bows!

      Delete
  8. I notice that since LST got up and running--what, 3 or 4 years ago?--that a lot more law schools are claiming to be focused on public interest law. That's an indirect way of saying that your investment in our law school will not pay off. In fact, it will burden you with huge amounts of life-constricting debt. So just be happy that we're allowing you to become an activist--an unpaid, non-attorney activist--by attending our law school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LST has been around 5 years, since 2009. The first public splash they made was in early 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_School_Transparency

      Delete