I guess its ok for it to exist, but I think it would suck and you WOULD learn less.

With the exception of maybe third year law school was quite busy enuogh. The result of cramming more classes into each semester would undoubtably be putting less work into each class.

This is so typical of NW. Charge students the same but give them less. I bet the course offerings are not nearly as good during these extra semesters. All that school cares about is money. I went there and things like this make me feel even better about throwing away all the alumni money requests I get in the mail.

This is exactly what the profession needs: a bunch of immature, fresh-out-of-undergrad associates who haven't had time to lose their frat-party mentality.

Jeezus, NW should start an online diploma program.

If it costs the same, why would someone give up that last year when you can relax and take classes that you enjoy.

Further, doesn't that screw your all important 2nd summer associate position?

9:34 - The two-year program has a requirement of two to three years of work experience to be admitted to it. So they won't be "fresh out of undergrad."

Let's get this straight. The new two-year program would ...

1. Cost the same;
2. Allow no breathers between semesters; and
3. Make it harder to find a full-time job at a big firm.

If NW really wanted to be innovative, they'd make their third year optional. It's not a complete waste of time, but it certainly isn't worth the price of a third year's tuition. Let students decide whether to make that investment in what's really an unnecessary bit of academic exploration.

9:34, only now they're going to be 23-24 instead of 25.

This is a new concept. For example, Cardozo has a program for incoming students to start in January or in the summer and you are done in 2 1/2 years. I did the January start date and was pretty happy with it. It is very difficult though because the law review and OCI gets confusing. Also, you don't get a first summer to work.

In the immortal words of Billy Madison.... Stay in school as long as you can....

9:34,

Why are your panties so bunched? If the 2 year grads are immature, the firms won't hire them... Do you honestly think that your fear, assuming it is rational, is best allayed by forcing people to take a completely useless (but very costly) year of school?

I don't get why some people oppose this on the ground that the students are unprepared for the practice of law. Isn't that what the bar is about.

Oh, 9:38, you are correct. Cardozo has such a program.

I don't get why some people oppose this on the ground that the students are unprepared for the practice of law. Isn't that what the bar is about.

.

9:36, I stand corrected.

-9:34.

"...inferior lawyers who haven't had time to develop intellectual and analytical skills..."

But the program will have the exact same number of courses and credits and hours of instruction as the three year program. Does this mean that Prof. Stone has just admitted that the development of "intellectual and analytical skills" is independent of the amount of time spent listening to him and his ilk spewing their irrelevancies? What a testimony to his own irrelevancy to the development of lawyers.

This sounds like a good idea in theory; third year is a complete waste of time. In practice, though, those students would be at a substantial disadvantage when it came to grades (an extra class??) and resume-building (e.g. law review).

Why are we moving in exactly the wrong direction? We need to be creating barriers to entry into our profession, not the other way around.

Take a hint from the AMA. Step 1: Yank accreditation from all third and fourth tier schools and limit the number of students schools can admit. Step 2. Require 3 years of school followed by a low-paid apprenticeship. Step 3. Watch lawyer compensation go through the roof as the number of lawyers plummets.

Assuming there is no real difference in cost, why give up your third year of law school. That's one year of vacation where you can spend time drinking, golf and gambling. . .

Also, may work for people who don't want to go to large law firms, but the kind of summer jobs you get after your first year isn't at par with the kind of job you get after your second year. Why not give yourself an additional year to find a good position for yourself.

NW doesn't solve the problem of 3rd year being a waste. The students will still be stuck taking the same crappy courses that we all take 3L.

42K a year now? It was just over 30K when I was going there ('04 grad). It was overpriced then, too.

Co-sign 9:46. We need to make this profession more elite, to increase prestige and incomes.

Medical school is so hard to get into that any graduate of an accredited U.S. med school, even a low-ranked one, will end up with a good, six-figure job (after residency). The same should be true of law.

9:46, You are doing it wrong. The presence in "this" profession of some schmoe who does $200 divorces in Bushwick has the same (non-existent) effect on your compensation as the existence of bicycles does on the price of your 5-series.

If you have more bicycles, then bicycles get cheaper - BMW's don't.

9:54, A shortage of transportation generally will drive up the cost of all modes of transportation.

This is another example of law schools taking advantage of potential law students by taking their money and giving them something not-so-great in exchange. It's a way for NW to deceptively increase its class size.

9:56, how exactly will the presence of 3 $200 divorce lawyers in Bushwick, instead of 1, affect the salaries of biglaw associates?

/it won't

The rest of the common law world let's 21 year-olds practice with LLB's. Seems to work out just fine for the young English lawyers I've met. I don't find the immaturity argument persuasive.

The three-year law degree is something law students and former law students like to b*tch about. They b*tch about it because they've earned the right, or are currently earning the right to b*tch about it. It, however, is there for a reason, and like so many other things we like to b*tch about, without them, we'd be far worse off. I will surely not be quiet in my preference to avoid hiring 2-yr JDs.

Oh, and 9:41... HA... are you kidding? When will firms have the opportunity to make in-depth observations as to the maturity of its incoming class? SA time? Mmmm... maybe, but not all firms take on SAs and not all those that do hire from their pool... Oh wait, without a second summer, there won't be any summer associate position... unless they turn it into a probation period that ends in the fall, leading right into work if selected.

Ultimately BigLaw won't likely bite, and so these 2-years, or dueces as they will come to be known, will end up looking elsewhere, bringing NW's salary numbers down... hmmm... GO FOR IT NW!!

This may potentially lower the already abysmal real-world standards of the legal profession in this country.

NW LAW TO TTT

This is not a new concept. Thirty years ago I started in the summer at The University of Texas School of Law and finished course work after four regular semesters and three summer sessions. Lots of us veterans were in a hurry to get the degree and get on with life. None of us had a problem finding work.

"In the immortal words of Billy Madison.... Stay in school as long as you can...."

Agreed. I'll be a 3L next year, and I'm just getting started with law school.

0L summer is to drink and party, 1L summer is to screw around at a non-profit, 2L summer is to get serious and 3L summer is to study for the bar... a two year program screws all up all four.

I love Prof. Stone's quote. I can't tell you how much I wish I had intellectual and/or analytical skills before law school. So many times, as my bachelor's-degree knuckles dragged along the floor, I strained to comprehend, however dimly, the clarity and insight that would come with repeating to a professor the facts of a case.

I think a 2 year J.D. is a great idea. I would have taken the two year option if it would have been available to me when I started law school. Even if I paid 3 years worth of tuition, I would have saved a huge chunk of money on living expenses.

I don't understand how this would hurt people who want to work for firms. Why couldn't the firms just hire people for summer associate positions after completion of their first years? They could interview students early in the spring (after they have two semesters worth of grades) and otherwise conduct their summer programs as usual.

People... Can we stop acting as though we have some singular legal profession of which we are all members? Let's be clear. There is biglaw + federal government, and then there is everything else.

A solo litigating slip-and-falls is not in the same profession as a biglaw corporate lawyer anymore than a podiatrist is in the same profession as a brain surgeon.

I was in the 4 year program at AU Law and I did just fine. I am now a legal librarian for a T1 school in Kansas.

It sounds like it costs the same but in truth costs less. You might be paying the same in tuition, but the third year is spent working full time instead of going to school full time. Think of the amount of money saved by being able to work full time and not part time. So in a sense, you do pay the same for tuition, but you still save in possible student loans for the cost of living.

The immaturity argument may appear unpersuasive until you consider characters like Randy Savage.

Wow. Just when I think I couldn't be any more ashamed of my Northwestern Law degree, they go and do something like this. Way to dilute whatever value a NW degree has and turn law school into a vocational school in the manner of any number of unaccredited California TTTs. Jesus.

SNAP INTO A TWO YEAR JD

Facially attractive as it might be to conceive of a degree in 2, rather than 3, years, I have to agree with Stone. The approach seems as though it would fine-tune the factory approach NU's been pursuing for years at the cost of the educational value for students (I took all my favorite classes during my third year), as well as the connection to NU. We go to law school to learn the law, but also to network with fellow students. Creating a subgroup like this shouldn't make it any easier for those students to "fit in" and develop relationships with their peers. I can't imagine the two tracks would play well together.

Just seems to be a very mechanical approach to law. Surprising that it comes from a school that's ranked as highly as it is due to the value on the education, rather than producing lawyers as quickly as possible...

I'm glad Jerry Springer/Terrorist U. decided to overcharge for even less education. You stay classy, Northwestern.

>>

It's an interesting idea; not sure how I feel about it except: 1) taking extra courses each semester just might break a lot of students, as the mental strain of a regular 3-year program is pretty heavy already; and 2) charging "by the program" is a f*cking scam.

I think it's fine. But I think that it also depends on the student, and the activities in which the student is involved.

Comments such as "third year is a complete waste of time" may be true for some students. I know that many third-year law students skip a lot of classes, take some of them pass fail, and generally don't do much.

Personally, my third year was very important to me. I put in a tremendous amount of work as an executive editor of our law review, and also took a few classes with great professors whom I found to be interesting.

So although students perhaps should have the option of finishing in two years, for many the law-school experience just wouldn't be the same. I disagree with Professor Stone; his comment seems somewhat paternalistic.

Amen, 10:15, Amen.

Hey, that new hire just atomic-slammed Mr. Skadden.

Northwestern is the new Dayton.

KY wrestling tonight in the main conference room at Skadden. Bring a friend.

LOL to Chicago Law's former dean is against a diverse marketplace. Amazing how free markets suck when you're stuck in one.

They have to have 2-3 years of substantive work experience before applying to the program, which would make them 24-25 when applying, so they'd be 26-27 when they graduated. What's everyone's problems with immaturity then?

NU grads to law librarians!

It's a good idea -- if you have the post-grad experience and want to do it, why should you be stuck in 3L (which is a colossal waste of time if you already have a job)? You can miss months of class, go on 2nd spring breaks, and do nothing during 3L year - so why make you lose a year of salary plus rent/living expenses (which are 15,000 to 20,000 in Chicago) if you don't want that?

And why the hate from U of C - another example of it's "stuck in the past" mentality.

10:12 - concerning summer associate positions for 2-year JD's, your "spring interview" plan may make some sense if many top law schools create similar 2-year programs. But how many law firms are going to expressly wait around for 25 NW law students? The best these students could hope for is that some places didn't meet their hiring targets.

And I don't see how they can have the same experience on law journals without doing a third year. What journal is going to take them knowing that they're not going to contribute in any way during the third year?

And charging "by the program" just shows how money-obsessed NW is. And it just sounds so TTT.

Chicago profs/students are the most annoying bunch in the T14. This is long overdue.

the only reason law school lasts three years is so lawyers can be mentioned in the same breath as doctors.

Widener is about to announce a I year internet correspondence course in response to NW's announcement.

I went into solo practice post clerkship, instead of going to a big firm. The stuff I did third year was very useful.

If you're actually going to practice law, the third year is helpful. The people I knew that wanted to take the non-traditional route took substantive classes and enhanced their education. The people that had a 100K + job lined up, took classes on things like "The Law and Philisophy," "The Law and the Environment," etc.

What's with the massive inferiority complex re the medical profession, 10:45? Do bankers compare themselves to doctors so obsessively? It's apples and oranges... Top lawyers and top doctors are all pretty smart folks - but they do things that are vastly different.

Wow. There are actually people so detached from reality they think relevant knowledge or skills are acquired at law school.

We are going in the wrong direction by adding more law schools and giving students a 2-year option. Law school should be a daunting field that is extremely difficult to enter. Now, the only thing daunting about it is the cost, but with loans, most law students don't even understand what they're getting themselves into because it seems like Monopoly money. All but the top 50 or so law schools should be immediately eliminated. The 3d year should be retained, but should require that each student do some kind of internship so they get additional work experience. Law school should not be treated like business schools, where the vast majority students enter after having worked. Now law school is more like a community college.

10:50, my 3L year I already had a job lined up with a big firm. I took "Torts and Philosophy" and "Environmental Law," (as well some other fairly useless classes, UCC the sole exception).

You are very much on the money, is what I'm getting at.

I learned that you can get mad amounts of ass in law school with cocaine. Oh, I guess I learned about substantive due process too.

It will make no difference at all. We all know how difficult it is to get a BigLaw job out of a lower ranked school, it will only be harder for those people that do the 2-year track unless they excel.

And, do you really think Northwestern kids are having trouble finding jobs? The top schools don't even give real grades because getting in is proof enough that you're intelligent enough to handle it. I would imagine the qualifications of the people that get into the 2-year program at NW will be so high as to ensure them quality jobs even if their course loads consisted primarily of silly putty and watching CNBC. No one learns anything useful in law school anyway.

Northwestern is a trashy school. This program just enhances their trashiness.

The negative comments are pretty surprising. For a group so interested in an extra 5k in bonus money, you'd think the opportunity to spend an extra year making money vs. incurring debt would seem attractive. I'd have missed the softball games, but find the $175k alternative pretty appealing.

Moreover, after your first job, do you think anyone will care about the difference, real or perceived, between the tracks? And as far as landing that first job: Do you really think a summer of boozing on the firm's dime is a better proving ground than previously holding a substantive job? I found having a real skill set as opposed to merely "thinking like a lawyer" is overlooked by most undergraduate law school applicants when it comes to contributing to the firm.

Saying that the lower ranked law schools are making it harder for law students to get jobs, is like saying that the University of Phoenix MBA program is making it worse for Harvard MBA students to get jobs.

There will always be top law students making $150k+ a year, regardless of the number of TTT graduates. Having more TTT graduates will only affect your employment if you are already a TTT graduate and thus competing with them, in which case you shouldn't be whining about TTT graduates like yourself.

Third year is a waste of time. Make it optional so people can start working right after 2L summer.

I think in principle fine as the opposite of part-time (i.e. not for everyone but why shouldn't someone be able to finish high school faster, or college if they can do more courses, same with law school etc. -- There was an ABA Journal story a while back about an 18-year-old lawyer in California?). However it seems silly to require two to three years of post-college work experience, why? How does that help someone finish a J.D. in two years instead of three? If anything people who haven't left academia may find it easier to deal with a more concentrated courseload.

All that said, if people pay the same money and end up with noticeably lower marks, that doesn't seem to be too much of a benefit...

3L year was a joke, i rarely went to class, never did work til exam time and had too much free time than i knew what to do with

why would i give that up? better than senior year of high school

What sort of Northwestern law students are making 200k a year starting off?
Unless they're selling dope

Baylor Law, located in Texas, has allowed students to graduate in 2 years for a while now.

This week brought us the 200th accredited law school in the United States. Now we learn certain schools will confer degrees in just 2 years, and not 3. It would be nice if the ABA were concerned with maintaining law as a profession rather than just accrediting more law schools and minting more lawyers without an eye toward the consequences of their actions (i.e., low lawyer pay, frivolous suits, entry level attorneys who can't find employment). This is where the ABA could learn something from the AMA.

For perspective, the NW shortened MBA program (essentially 1 year instead of 2, plus summer stuff like here) has been a big hit without obliterating the traditional 2-year MBA.

On this, the maturity argument is bogus if you consider the 2-3 years substantive work experience requirement. Someone who has done 2-3 good years at a consulting firm or bank is a jillion times more mature than someone who goes straight from undergrap to law school, a situation not helped by everyone in the recruiting process telling the twerp what what a genius he is.

The education itself probably does suffer, if one considers the amount of time one can exert on individual courses + extras important, but for older students (particularly married ones or people with kids) who just want to get through there and get the degree, it sounds like it could be a good option.

11:32 (and fellow travelers),

Your professional worth and dignity are determined by your own success, not by the bottom half of the profession (unless, that is, you are in that bottom half).

Carl Icahn is a businessman. So is the guy who sells pretzels from a cart on the corner of 40th and 8th. Icahn's statute is not diminished by the fact that Pretzel Guy is - like himself -a businessman.

It makes no sense to regulate entry into this profession solely because you are afraid how inferior attorneys (important to their poorer clients) will reflect on *you.*

11:30 - Not clear, but 11:18 must be referring to the net gain (savings on living expense + big law salary).

Still rather sling keys.

sorry, that should of course be "stature."

10:12(2) and 10:50 are right on -

This blog is very much dominated by kids (yes, that is what you are regardless of age) coming out of law school to walk into the high school environment of Biglaw.

Many people want to practice law, not practice politics and doc review. (And no, I'm not bashing Biglaw or the associates that go that route. Many have worked hard re: reciting cases to professors and writing down what they are told to write down on a test. They can take advantage of an opportunity to make a Biglaw salary and pay off student loans. Too many, unfortunately, are douchebags). The third year of law school can help you develop skills to learn how to a.) market to potential clients b.) draft and file a pleading on your own c.) argue the merits of a case before a judge/jury.

Granted, you may not need law school at all to accomplish these goals, but that third year can make all the difference in developing one to practice law.

I totally phone in my 3rd year at UVA. It was a joke. The softball was fun though.

Just going to water down the profession.

11:30
Baylor law is a TTT. I work in Dallas and I can't stand all the dbags at my gym with Baylor Law t-shirts. Seriously, I understand you went to a law school, but it sucks, so don't advertise it.

Northwestern ....where LLM means lots and lots of money (tuition). This along with the flood of 2L transfers and the proliferation of mediocre LLM programs just gooses the coffers of the schooll. That's the game. Game over.

First off, this isn't very different than how Northwestern runs its JD/MBA program. (I decided not to do it, after admitted, when they said they'd charge me the HIGHER of the two schools' tuition for three years. Gee, thanks.)

Second, there are a lot of folks who are older (not 22-22) to whom this would be incredibly appealing. For some, grad school isn't a wanted break from reality--it's "time off" from building a nest egg.

I'd be very interested in this program from a money-saving standpoint (living expenses) and for the chance to jumpstart my legal career early.

For all of the haters here, it sort of reminds me of frat initiation or letterman's club initiation. The pervasive mentality here seems to be "I 'suffered' through 3 years of tuition so you should as well." Not sure I follow that logic.

Law school should be one year and out- anything more is just law schools taking their cut. Big firms and judges effectively make their recruiting decisions based on the first year (try messing up your first year and making up for it in your third), which is a good indication of how much value the second and third years add.

As someone who is considering NW, can folks who know elaborate on

1) Why NW is trashy
2) Why you are angrily tossing out donation requests
3) What (specifically) made you upset about your experience.

I would very much appreciate your comments.

What's the big deal? Guys in my high school used to get JDs in two years all the time.

Actually, 12:05, Baylor is ranked 55 in the latest U.S. News rankings. Not top tier, but not far off; certainly not TTT. Also, Baylor is fairly well-known nationwide for its Trial Ad program. So get over yourself.

And no, I don't/didn't go to Baylor.

Actually, 12:05, Baylor is ranked 55 in the latest U.S. News rankings. Not top tier, but not far off; certainly not TTT. Also, Baylor is fairly well-known nationwide for its Trial Ad program. So get over yourself.

And no, I don't/didn't go to Baylor.

Guys at my high school used to introduce 2-year JD programs all the time. It was no big deal.

Careful David---- these students will be radioactive to law firms - during their one summer they will be viewed as 1L summer associates and thus not employable except during manic booms. They will then be disgruntled students and the program may well collapse or just be a fraud on the market. What's next a 6 year combined JD BA MD degree --- or a 4 year BA JD degree? This is brain dead stupiod but a good way to fill up class rooms during the summer. Why not just emulate GTwn and start a night school?

Careful David---- these students will be radioactive to law firms - during their one summer they will be viewed as 1L summer associates and thus not employable except during manic booms. They will then be disgruntled students and the program may well collapse or just be a fraud on the market. What's next a 6 year combined JD BA MD degree --- or a 4 year BA JD degree? This is brain dead stupiod but a good way to fill up class rooms during the summer. Why not just emulate GTwn and start a night school?

11:46,
There will always be a "bottom half of the profession." Kudos to you if you are the best lawyer to walk the face of the earth and everybody else is below you, but it is most likely that the dilutive worth of a law degree effects you, and everyone else, to a certain extent. I personally don't care much about the prestige that attaches to a degree because I agree that it's your performance that ultimately will earn you prestige. But my original point holds true that when you increase the pool of lawyers so vastly, you inevitably produce strains in the profession that in some form or another work their way to all levels of the profession.

Is this any different from what Michigan Law, and a few other law schools, already do? They start a whole section in summer that graduates a semester early. Seems to me that this is pretty similar, just 1 semester shorter.

10:12 AM(2) “There is biglaw + federal government, and then there is everything else.”
Thanks. This is the big law attitude I’ve come to appreciate – it makes it that much easier for my three attorney non-profit to beat up on big law attorneys case after case after case.

Guys at Hofstra used to talk about how useless the third year of law school was all the time. It was no big deal.

I thought this was a great idea until I saw they were going to charge the same amount of money. WTF?

Since I searched the post and comments for the word "toilet" and couldn't find any such reference, allow me to be the first say:

Northwestern = TOILET

This isn't so revolutionary. It's basically a summer start program with the three or four courses from the last semester squished into the other semesters. And it will probably cost the same.

Perhaps some lower-tier schools will follow NU's lead, but most of the T14 will probably not jump on the bandwagon.

The 3rd year is a waste of time, and acts as a barrier to anyone older than 27 from entering law school. It's about time that people went back to the LLB. People forget too easily that lawyers were plenty competent after two yeas of law school. If I had to choose between someone with two yeas of law school and one year of practice, vs. three years of law school, it would sure as hell be an easy choice!

I look forward to NU's California Bar pass rate dropping even farther.

NU to 52%!

I did the NU JD-MBA program and essentially had two years of law school. I am doing quite well now in Big Law Firm without having a third year of law school classes. I say kudos to NU to provide options to students and not being tied to an unnecessary three year program just because "that's how its always been."

So this is 5 semesters instead of 6? Revolutionary.

Northwestern=TTT

I guess this is a good start, but it doesn't even begin to fix all the problems with legal education / admission to the bar.

9:41 Haha no, the Bar Exam does not sort out who is prepared to practice law or not. Some serous retards can (eventually) pass a bar in some state.

Good Idea- the third year is nothing but a money maker for the school- you could probably pass the bar after 18 months of classes.

While I am not sure that a 2-year program is the best of ideas, I think most people here are missing the intended target of this program. With a 2-3 year work requirement as a minimum, I would hazard a guess that this program is almost solely geared toward people coming from the business world or other professional career tracks that either want a law background to supplement their current direction, or a quick change to a new and more satisfying profession. Most of the people I have encountered in either of these positions are fairly impatient to continue on with their life, and a substantial amount already have established career paths outside of the typical big-law progression.

More like two months of classes.

Barbri could replace law school entirely, and the profession wouldn't change measureably.

Fascinating responses. Somewhat nearsighted though.... (1) True, the third year is a waste at some schools (2) Let us not ignore the opportunity cost of a biglaw job vs. one year of law school is a huge advantage (3) Yes 3L is a big moneymaker for schools, but students will not save money under the NW plan (4) Northwestern students are typically older and 90% have previous work experience, so the maturity point is absolutely moot. The ONE argument against it (I think) would be the negative imapct on the campus community. How involved can you be with such a demanding schedule and having one missing year. Northwestern students on the 2 yr program would probably be less inclined to be involved in the journals, trial teams, clinics, etc. Third year is what you make of it, Northwestern has the nation's leading clinical program, great trial teams, and good moot court programs. Why forego those experiences?

2:31: "why forego these opportunities?" Are you serious? Because most people can find something better to do with a year of their time and the tens of thousand of dollars a thrid year would cost them. Worst case scenario a person can spend a year at a firm, learn much more and make some money. Given a choice, I think (and hope) most would pass on spending a year doing journals, clinics, etc.

When are these students going to recruit for summer jobs? In the fall of their "1L" year after only a summer semester of school?

2:50 - yup, that's the plan

I'm guessing the small class size and mandated prior work experience will make it easy for them to get SA jobs (based on similarly situated current NU students getting 1L SA jobs)

This is a great idea. 3L year is pointless. In fact, law school is generally pointless aside from learning to read cases and understand the basic concepts of law such as contracts, torts, con law, etc. I've learned more practicing law in a law firm than I did in law school. Unless law schools want to change their curriculum so it's practical to people's careers in the way that med school and b-school is, then I don't seen any problem with this. Asking people to waste a third year learning mindless philosophy is pointless. And I don't mind NW charging the same price. People are paying for the degree, not the number of years, and they'll make significant more money working in a firm during what would have otherwise been their 3L year.

Two years of classroom work is fine. Anything more than that is just jacking around. Then, have a third year consisting of a mandatory appreticeship during which people can look for their full time gig. Kind of like medical school, which does a hell of a lot better job training doctors than a law school does training lawyers. That guy from Chicago is clueless. His comments assume that law school teaches people how to be lawyers. Anyone who has practiced knows that nothing is farther from the truth. At its best, all law school does is teach people how to think (and, if you are lucky, write) like a litigator.

I didn't think it was possible but Georgetown is no longer the biggest factory in the T14.

Northwestern law yeah you know me.
Churn out degrees - 2 year JD.
That’s how we do we're TTT.
We ain't no school we a factory.

I made it through a Big Ten law school in two years by going through the summers, and got offers from Arnold and Porter , Latham, etc. (and yes, I accepted one of those offers). It was no big deal.

There are several comments about how law schools don't teach practical lawyering skills. I'm curious to hear thoughts on what, if any, law schools out there actually do a good job of teaching its students how to practice law. Any ideas?

This might be a good topic for its own post, as I often hear this criticism of legal education.

Guys at my high school used to kick off groundbreaking J.D. programs all the time. It was no big deal.

I learned that you can write A papers with cocaine. HAd a GF at the time, so not sure what its effect on ass-getting would be.

To 7:19--I am not sure, short of running fake transactions with difficult clients, how a "simulated" corporate law environment would be created effectively in a school setting. I am not sure this is an issue with one school over another, or the "quality" of teaching as much as the fact that school is academic and working is practical. End of story.

"Actually, 12:05, Baylor is ranked 55 in the latest U.S. News rankings. Not top tier, but not far off; certainly not TTT. Also, Baylor is fairly well-known nationwide for its Trial Ad program."

No, it's not known nationwide for its Trial Ad program, that's just the fluff it tells its prospectives and students to make them think they are special. And a rank of 55 is toilet water. Way to aim high.

Southwestern Law School (http://www.swlaw.edu) has the SCALE 2-year program which has been in existence for years and has proven to be a good option for many lawyers. This isn't a new idea, and it obviously works. That said, I enjoyed all three years of law school, so I'm glad I didn't rush.

Southwestern Law School (http://www.swlaw.edu) has the SCALE 2-year program which has been in existence for years and has proven to be a good option for many lawyers. This isn't a new idea, and it obviously works. That said, I enjoyed all three years of law school, so I'm glad I didn't rush.

Southwestern Law School (http://www.swlaw.edu) has the SCALE 2-year program which has been in existence for years and has proven to be a good option for many lawyers. This isn't a new idea, and it obviously works. That said, I enjoyed all three years of law school, so I'm glad I didn't rush.

i dont like this and am not particularly inclined to hire grads of any 2 year program.

northwestern has their shiTTTy LLM program and now TTThis....

Penn State Philly has a one-year program. You start in September, take eight classes per semester, work your second-year-summer internship during the holiday break, and graduate in May! I think JoePa pioneered this innovation. Needless to say, this innovation may have been what sparked Penn State Philly's rise to T6 and explains why they have so many fucking campuses.

I'd have gladly taken a 4th year at UVA--I was not at all happy to leave law school

The new NW 5 semester wonders will be at a profound disadvantage in the job market. They will be interviewing with 1 semester of grades to show potential employers. They won't be members of law review or journals or moot court - just naked one semester wonders. The student with less than a 3.5 will be screwed as far as BigLaw or frankly somewhat BigLaw. A terrible idea to launch in what will be a terrible market. Once again deans who went to top 5 schools and had law review grades launch a rotten idea with no appreciation of the consequences for those outside their self inflated penumbra of self importance. But what the hecknow you can keep the factory running year round - just fine tuning until you launch the night division.

I know Southwestern in Los Angeles isn't the best school ever, but they have been doing the 2 year "SCALE" program for several years.

One of the last apprentie winners was a Southwestern SCALE JD grad.

I know Southwestern in Los Angeles isn't the best school ever, but they have been doing the 2 year "SCALE" program for several years.

One of the last apprentie winners was a Southwestern SCALE JD grad.

I know Southwestern in Los Angeles isn't the best school ever, but they have been doing the 2 year "SCALE" program for several years.

One of the last apprentie winners was a Southwestern SCALE JD grad.

*apprentice winner

*apprentice winner

*apprentice winner

I have less than a 3.2 from NU and I had numerous offers for a biglaw job. And that's with a full year of support for that 3.2. I'm thinking those students with less than 3.5s, but with stellar work experience discounting their fluke semester, wont be as bad off as you're making them out to be.

@11:22,

I have less than a 3.2 from NU and I had numerous offers for a biglaw job. And that's with a full year of support for that 3.2. I'm thinking those students with less than 3.5s, but with stellar work experience discounting their fluke semester, wont be as bad off as you're making them out to be.

1:37:
You go to Jerry Springer U. Good luck on your career hosting Transsexual Nazis on your daytime trash show.

anyone inform the fuctard who came up with this clever idea that most large lawfirms are DELAYING start dates because there is NO WORK for junior associates?

The 2 year JD program is an excellent idea.

Trust me, the 25 students in the program will be filled with highly marketable candidates. Candidates will have 2~3 years of "substantive" work experience, e.g. ibanking, accounting, consulting..etc. And vast majority will be coming from a prestigious Undergrad. The admissions office will make sure this happens.

Biglaw firms like Skadden and Latham would rather train prestigious students with mediocre grades than work with top 2nd tier students.

NU actually has a 2 year JD program for international students and ALL of them have been very successful, easily landing BIGLAW jobs.

Through this two-year program, NU will be able to recruit students that might otherwise go to Columbia or NYU. Of course, not all t-5 law candidates will be persuaded by this accelerated program. But recruiting 25 students from Columbia and NYU is a very doable goal.

Also, expect these highly qualified 2-year-candidates to be on scholarship.

1/2 of your recruiting is determined by prestige factors such as where you went to undergrad, name of your law school, and quality of pre-law job experience.

Finally, this 2 year program will be difficult to get into. Like I said, expect students with Columbia/NYU numbers (LSAT 172+ / GPA 3.7+).

8:41,

The flufff it tells its prospectives? Isn't Baylor a top 10 trial ad program per USNWR?

Very TTT.

From a Long-Time BigLaw Firm Partner:
Far from a “visionary experiment,” NU’s poorly conceived program in pursuit of what it admits to be a “business model” approach feeds into the profession’s biggest problem: That “business model” approach has contributed mightily to the growing ranks of unhappy lawyers. The accelerated JD just moves students through school more quickly with course overloads and omitted semester breaks, robbing them of time to consider whether they have even chosen the right careers. For those in the accelerated program who want to pursue BigLaw Firm jobs, their summer associate (and, therefore, permanent employment) opportunities will be far more limited: Having completed only a single summer of law school, they will be the equivalent of first-years when they interview in the fall, competing against second-years with more complete portfolios of grades and law review-type credentials.
Stay away from this one and enroll someplace where the third-year emphasizes practical training and clinical programs.

12:22 pm may be a "long-time biglaw firm partner" but I wonder for how long given that attitude. If you want to stay tied to this archaic ridiculous system, then go for it. I seriously doubt anyone doing the 2 year program (who will have actual work experience instead of cite checking experience that comes from law review) would even want to work there. Oh and by the way, at NU you can do practical training and clinical programs as a 2nd year.

12:27 pm missed the point. If you think you can include meaningful practical training and clinical programs as you compress three years of bar-required academic work into two years, you're kidding yourself about what that two-year experience will become. If you think law review means simply cite-checking and does not matter to prospective employers of all kinds (including judicial clerkships), you're naive and wrong. If, as 12:27 assumes, those opting for the two-year program have no desire to work where the vast majority of NU and other top law school graduates start their careers, namely, large law firms, then the accelerated JD will not achieve an essential element of NU's stated goal: serving its employer consituency. So what, exactly is the point of this program for the students choosing it? Saving a year's worth of living expenses and a semester of time in return for what -- and at what longer-term personal and professional cost?