It appears as if Oakbrook Law outscored all but one CA ABA approved law school on the bar exam. Their 73% first time pass rate was second only to UCLA's 79%. http://www.calbar.ca.gov./calbar/pd...RY2004STATS.pdf Taft didn't do so bad either. http://www.taftu.edu/barstats.htm The time has come for the ABA to give a few of the DL law schools a serious look. The tuition at my ABA approved law school is nearly $30,000 per year. What a ripoff considering how well Oakbrook Grads do on one of the toughest bar exams in the nation. DL law schools are more convenient, and much more affordable. And apparently, their graduates are competitive on the general bar exam where it really counts. After a full year of law school, I can't think of much that could not be completed via DL. Only the oral arguments weren't DL friendly.
It sounds like you are assuming that the ABA cares about fairness and logic, rather than the lining of their own pockets.
I voted "No" only because it's such a blanket question. Graduates of some CA-approved law schools have done terribly as a group on the bar exam, while Oak Brook grads do amazingly well. I wish there was an option for "On a case-by-case basis".
I think you're right, I believe that law school can be successfully completed via distance; so long as there's ample opportunity for give-and-take in the online forums and discussion groups, I think it can be more effective than traditional L-school. Oak Brook bears this out--kudos to their students and faculty!
I agree with Bruce. If the question were, "Should the ABA accredit California schools on a case-by-case basis," that would be an emphatic "Yes." But there are and have been some really dreadful state-licensed ones -- both the distance learning and the residential. With law, "dreadful" simply refers to Bar pass rates. Back when Southland (which evolved into LaSalle) was Bar-eligible, they would often have zero passes of both Baby Bar and the final bar.
Ditto to everything Bruce said. I also voted "no." If the question could be re-written, I would give it a resounding "yes." However, at this point, there are only 2 or 3 DL law schools that are good enough to get ABA approval. The rest have a long way to go, in my opinion. Tom Nixon
Busho4's link didn't work for me, so here it is again: http://www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions/Statistics/FEBRUARY2004STATS.pdf In answer to mrw142, I think MJ stands for Muckraking Journalist. Something like that... I agree with the "case by case" concept. But what should the criteria be?
That should be Mary Jane or Master of Journalism though there is a Master of Jurisprudence. The former can become law-related if you're careless.
Come on fellas, get with it.... Should the ABA accredit DL law schools? The question could not be more clear. Of course it would be on a case by case basis.
I am like many others who post to the forum in that I tend to judge a school on its Bar pass rate. Although even the ABA considers pass rate important, it really can't be the WHOLE basis for judging a school. The problem is, the J.D. degree is not only the first professional degree in law but academically speaking it also serves as the functional "doctorate" for teaching and research. If the ABA decides to accredit completely on-line programs, they should look at the academic aspects of the preparation as well as the professional aspects.
