New Law School Auctioning Tuition?

That was for the school's first auction only. If you look later (posted in this thread), the school began auctioning the ENTIRE program (minus normal fees) for $1,000 which ended at $1,326. Then after this they auctioned the entire program for $3,000, which was won by cpaq. It appears that they have stopped this practice and no new auctions have appeared for a few weeks.

 

It isn't apparent to me that planning to spend all four years at the same unaccredited CA-registered correspondence school is that important a consideration, at least until after the first year and passing the Baby Bar. So if the learning environment at a new school doesn't work for me, or the school has problems, I assume I could transfer to another nonaccredited CA-registered program if I was making satisfactory academic progress.

The issue here isn't necessarily where you study, it is how well and how much you study. I am assuming passing the Baby Bar would make me a prime candidate for a transfer admission in this subprime environment. Am I wrong?

 

I don't see anything wrong with your thoughts here. The only issue I see is this:

If a school has given you the tools to pass the baby bar (and you are successful in this endeavor), why would you want to transfer to another school for the remaining three years when the cost of your tuition is already covered?

 

I think that cpaq is correct to the extent that the real purpose of a California D/L J.D. program is to provide the framework for performing and documenting four years of law study.

I do wonder whether cpaq will run into the same set of problems in the California program as kept him from devoting 20 hours per week to the University of London. I absolutely agree, btw, that London demands at least that much time.

A score of 158 on the LSAT is decidedly acceptable; coupled with a ugpa of 3.5 or so, most ABA approved schools would definitely consider you. But it probably wouldn't open the gates of the (or reduced) tuition nirvanna. The student's age becomes a legitimate factor in deciing where to go.

 

From experience I can say that the London LLB is a good 20 hours per week, and probably more once you factor in additional time spent preparing for exams. I was probably spending 50+ hours a week for the last couple weeks prior to exams.

 

DL law study

As one who went through the process, I am happy to share my experience.

I enrolled in British-American University for two reasons: Low tuition ($2K/yr), which they guaranteed for 4 years; and video lectures. At the time, I was looking at Taft and Concord. The trump card for BAU was that they had video lectures. At the time, they were the only DL school that did.

Fast forward. I passed the Baby Bar on my first try with a good score, finally graduated, and problems began. The school said that I could take the bar exam after completing 4 11 month years. CalBar didn't agree, and decreed that I needed an additional semester of law study. Thankfully, BAU did not charge me for it, but it was a pain to complete.

About the time my admittance ticket for the bar exam arrived in the mail, I received a letter from BAU informing me that the BPPVE terminated their approval for failure to file a change of ownership form.

I passed the bar exam, and BAU apparently is no more. If I ever need a transcript, will I be able to track down the former dean/owner and get one? Don't know. Will there be a stigma associated with graduating from a defunct school? Don't know.

But what I do know is this: I have a California law license. The qualifying degree cost $8,000.

I'm pretty happy with that.

Christopher

 

20 hours/week

BTW, I agree with the 20 hrs/week figure for DL law study.

If you can't regularly devote 20 hrs/wk to study, don't do it. You are almost certain to fail. Once you fall behind, it is very difficult to catch up.

It is very easy to come up with an excuse to skip a day that you just don't feel like studying, promising yourself that you will make it up on the weekend, etc. It won't work.

Before embarking on DL law study, make sure that you have the time, and self-discipline, to do the work. There is no hand holding.

If you have a family, full time job, etc. think hard before making the committment. Fortunately, I have a very supportive business partner who was willing to take on some of my responsibilities so that I could pursue law study.

Christopher

 

Just listen to the story about British-American University, its one of many law schools that closed.

I would doubt that National will be here in 4 years or that they will survive the State Bar taking control over all unaccredited law schools from the BPPVE.

The Dunn bill's next hearing is Aug 9th.

But read David Boyd's earlier post here, the State Bar is planning on getting the Calif Supreme Court to make changes to the rules
regarding unaccredited law schools irrespective of any new law passed in California.

My predication in 2 years more then half of the unaccredited
law schools are gone. NWCU and TAFT will be around for years and years.

 

Oak Brook College of Law is a very likely player in the long-term future as well:

http://www.obcl.edu/

Dave

 

Here is another example, just within the past week a new correspondence law schools was added to the State Bar website, which is called "MD Kirk Law School".

The fly-by-nights are slipping in before the State Bar tightens up the rules.

Kirk doesnt have a website yet by I can only imagine the promises they make and how the school is going to be different, blah, blah, blah.

If anyone is thinking about distance learning for a law school,
just check the records. Both NWCU and TAFT have been around since around 1982.

Both schools have produced lots of lawyers although personally by my accounts NWCU has more that passed the bar and that can be verified by Martindale directory and by the state bar as listed as an attorney in California.

Again, most of these schools will be gone soon with the elimination of the non bar J.D. degree by the State Bar and
each school operating by having to have students pass the baby
bar in order to go to 2nd 3rd and 4th year to get the J.D. degree
those schools that have poor bar performance will be gone!

Most correspondence law schools push the non-bar as a cash cow operation, hence the low student/graduate/bar pass rate.

Now that the State Bar is going to eliminate the non-bar J.D. degree since it is a professional degree and should be bar qualifying in order to be awarded, most of not all of these new law schools will just dry up.

Now is definetly not the time to try a new law school with the rules about to change, very very risky.

 

For that matter, I think that now is not the time to try ANY law school with a few exceptions (Harvard, Stanford, Yale, etc.) because it is too great a risk that you won't succeed. Even any other ABA law school is just way too risky!

It is just too likely that your potential school will probably fold. If your law school manages to stay together long enough for you to graduate, then you will probably fail the bar. Even if you manage to jump through these hoops, you'll still probably fail because you're going to be competing with Ivy League graduates. Right?

My point: One can almost always do better, but cpaq did not make a bad choice by risking $3000. The worst thing that can happen is that National Law School folds before its first classes even start. This is not a likely scenario though, as we know that National is set up with the ecollege platform, it is pretty clear that it has at least some decent financial resources. How long it will last, nobody knows. In this case, at least, I am convinced that the reward far outweighs the risk.

 

Hm.

I dunno.

While it is true that a lot (majority?) of D/L law schools fold, it seems to me that an even greater likelihood is that the D/L student will fail to put in the hours.

Hope not, but the London LL.B. is, if anything, more forgiving than a Bar qualifying California program can be.

two and a half hours a day seven days a week for four years...fall behind and it's hell to catch up.

 

I stand by my comments.

Once the State Bar takes control over unaccredited law schools including correspondence law schools MORE THEN 50% will be gone in a short period of time.

When the State Bar eliminates the ridiculous non-bar J.D. degree only the serious correspondence law schools will survive.

Those that have decades of proven ability to graduate BAR QUALIFYING students will survive and the number of those schools are small.

First school to bite the dust probably MD Kirk Law School perhaps National since it appears to be a Concord clone but no DETC accreditiation and with the requirement that all correspondence law school students pass the Baby Bar with the elimination of the non-bar J.D. many many more schools simply will not have the financial resources to continue.

TAFT AND NWCU and perhaps CONCORD will survive.

Now is NOT the time to throw $3,000 for 4 years of law school down the toilet on a gamble that some law school like National (that is a WAL-MART discounter type operation) is going to be around in 4 years.

Not based on Saratoga University or British-American University or Laurel University or the dozens of other correspondence law schools over the years that I have seen close down in California.

NOT WITH THE NEW STATE BAR REGULATIONS COMING!

 

Re: Hm.

I couldn't agree more. I think that this is the biggest factor in the success (or failure) of DL law students.

I've been casually watching the California DL law scene for years and even though it is obvious that many schools don't seem to last for very long, the average appears to be longer than four years. This is part of the reason why I am convinced that a $3,000 risk for National is not a bad decision.

Even though JDLLM2 appears to take his "inside information" as equivalent of the word of God it is quite likely that any coming changes (which may or may not happen) may take years to implement. This will certainly be enough time for a student to get his or her $3000 worth of education. Furthermore, in the event of National folding, California residents are able to make a claim from the STRF (student tuition recovery fund), almost COMPLETELY eliminating any risk of financial loss.

Another reason why I am skepical to give credit to JDLLM2's claims is his attitude toward any school which is not Taft or NWCU. He seems convinced that ALL startup schools are attempts to seperate poor unsuspecting potential law students from their money without providing anything in return. I would have to believe that MOST of these schools probably have the best of intentions. Whether they succeed or not in the long run will take time to evaluate. I believe it to be highly irresponsible to dismiss taking a chance on a new school as to, "throw $3,000 for 4 years of law school down the toilet" without AT LEAST researching the operation.

 

Schools with good intention, lol, that isnt how one should approach a Juris Doctor professional degree legal education!

Sure if you want to no longer be able to get official transcripts
or a copy of your diploma and always be going around explaining
that your law school alma mater is closed down.

Start that conversation and see where that leads in the legal community, lol!

In fact when Saratoga closed alot of students could not get their transcripts to transfer or to take the bar exam and had to start over, the internet was full of these peoples begging for help in
their situation.

If a student is serious about being bar qualified attend one of two law schools around since 1982, its either Taft or NWCU, if you cant afford more then $3,000 you really are not serious about getting a law degree and becoming an attorney at law!

DISCOUNT LAW SCHOOLS? LOL NAH A BAD IDEA!

 

The fact of the matter is that even one who attends one of the best correspondence law schools such as Taft, NWCU, Oak Brook, or Concord (and there is no reason why we shouldn't believe that National may very well join this category down the road) will receive little, IF ANY, respect in the legal community. This is simply the current nature of DL law education and it is unlikely to change anytime in the near future.

It is also unlikely that someone who becomes an attorney through this route will be worried about explaining that his or her alma mater was closed down. Very rarely, if ever, does this become an issue (with the likely exception of a new graduate attempting to obtain employment). Since cbkent had this very thing happen to him (with BAU shutting its doors), perhaps he can comment on his situation?

From what I have read, the state bar of California and many of the other correspondence law schools, went out of their way to help students that were caught up in the Saratoga disaster.

The fact that you have labeled National a "discount law school" without doing any research seems to make little sense. If you take a look at their website it appears that they charge anywhere between $6700 to $10,000 annual tuition (much more expensive that the majority of correspondence law schools), depending on any discounts received. From what I understand, the ebay auctions were a temporary marketing strategy intended to turn attention to a new school. From what I saw, only three students took advantage of these auctions.

You must understand that all schools are startup schools at one point in their history. While risk is definately greater for a new school, it is irresponsible to label them all as doomed to failure. Especially as is obvious that you have done little, if any, research on National or MD Kirk before speaking out against them.

 

How does a person's finances in ANY way relate to his or her desire to study law?????

***Dude scratches his head***

 

"The fact of the matter is that even one who attends one of the best correspondence law schools such as Taft, NWCU, Oak Brook, or Concord """""(and there is no reason why we shouldn't believe that National may very well join this category down the road"""""

That statement from Dude had me laughing so hard.

The road to ruin in correspondence law school land is full of
schools that never could make it even with NO ENFORCEMENT from the State Bar and a weak BPPVE Agency.

How are they going to make it with TOUGH NEW RULES AND ELIMINATION OF THE STUPID NON-BAR J.D. CASH COW?

New rules are coming that will cost tons of money to new schools in order to comply with the State Bar and with the elimination of the non-bar J.D. degree and already 15 or 16 correspondence law schools currently in operation, National, Kirk, and many many others simply will close down!

Frankly there is not enough law students to support 16 correspondence law schools especially since so many states
eliminated the non ABA J.D. and ABA LL.M route, that loophole is closed and the options for correspondence law schools are very narrow in other states.

Only the best of the best will survive.

SIMPLELY PUT, NATIONAL WONT SURVIVE.

CHECK BACK WITH ME IN 2 YEARS I WILL BE SO RIGHT AND SO LAUGHING.

 

"From what I have read, the state bar of California and many of the other correspondence law schools, went out of their way to help students that were caught up in the Saratoga disaster"

EXCEPT, those students that could NOT get transcripts WERE NOT GIVEN CREDIT FOR LAW STUDY AT SARATOGA OR THOSE STUDENTS THAT DID NOT HAVE OFFICIAL RECORD OF GRADUATION WERE DENIED TO TAKE THE BAR EXAM.

This is a fact and which lead among other things for the State Bar to decide to take control away from the BPPVE and give it to the State Bar!

It was a huge deal here in California in 2004 in the legal community and non-legal community and made a laughing stock out of correspondence law schools.

Why would any student risk this?

TAFT is expensive but DETC accredited, NWCU is about $11,000 for the full 4 years AND THEY WILL BE AROUND IN 4 YEARS. no risk.

Why would anyone go with a law school in business 1 month?

 

I can't help but notice the irony of your comments. You may think that attending unproven correspondence schools such as National is not the way to approach a professional degree legal education. It is clear though that the MAJORITY of all state bars, the ABA, and both legal and general populations would probably agree that attending ANY correspondence law school is NOT the way to approach this kind of education.