Looking for The Inside Scoop on Part-Time Law School Programs?

We’re working on an upcoming podcast covering this topic.

Why attend law school part-time? With law school tuition on the rise, and an uncertain job market, many working professionals just can’t afford to walk away from their careers to pursue their law degree. For these folks, a part-time law school program makes the most sense. Basic financial reasons may also propel others to seek a program that is less expensive in an immediate sense as tuition costs are budgeted over a longer period of time (4 years) rather than condensed into 3 years of a traditional full-time degree program. Some part-timers are non-traditional students who may be older or who do not come to law school directly from undergraduate school or after taking just a year or two off after college.

In our upcoming segment, we asked deans of admissions at law schools with part-time programs about what they look for in applicants, about the merits and drawbacks of part-time programs and what these programs offer students. We get perspective on recruitment and job prospects for part-time students from deans of career services and we hear from a part-time law student at Georgetown about what it’s really like to balance law school life with an already full schedule!

Guests you will hear from include:

•Andy Cornblatt, Dean of Admissions, Georgetown University Law Center
•Stephen Brown, Fordham Law School, Dean of Enrollment Services
•Melissa Lennon, Assistant Dean for Career Planning, Temple University, Beasley School of Law
•Jannell Roberts, Assistant Dean of Admissions, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles
•Meghan Morris, Part-Time Law Student, Georgetown University Law Center

Stay tuned for more on this upcoming segment!

Shifting Paradigm for Law Firms and Legal Education?

There's been a lot of discussion lately about the changes taking place in Law Firm Land (for purposes of this discussion, including Big Law as well as mid-size and smaller law firms) and in legal education. Our earlier posts have addressed some of these discussions in the context of proposed changes to law firm recruitment at law schools, proposed changes to legal education and the effects of clients needs on demand for legal services from law firms.

And here comes another report documenting some of the changes that are taking place in the private practice arena. According to the ABA Journal, a new study released at ABA Techshow, “The Evolution of the Legal Profession: A Conversation with the Legal Community's Thought Leaders on the Front Lines of an Industry,” there is a "sweeping evolution" taking place in law firm structure and management and client expectations. The ABA Journal reports that the study was conducted by Ari Kaplan, a lawyer and technology and marketing author, and "is the first in a series that combines insights from a cross-section of the legal industry." This includes interviews with "practicing lawyers, academics, in-house counsel and CEOs about client expectations, shifting cultures and ways to prepare law students for the business of legal practice."

Some key points from the study:

•There are significant changes to billing structures and client expectations. "Nearly 75% agreed that the profession is experiencing a sweeping evolution that will be marked by permanent changes to billing structures, firm organization and value and efficiency expectations from clients".

•Nevertheless, the billable hour is sill alive and well in Law Firm Land.

•While law firms may be trying to come up with alternative billing arrangements that work for them and for clients, it is a challenge to do so given the business model of law firms (i.e., their capital structure).

•Clients are less willing to pay for 1st year associate work. (85% of those surveyed were aware of instances where corporate clients refused to pay for first-year-associate work done on their cases and one Kaye Scholer partner noted that “E-Discovery tools have eliminated the need to have junior associates review boxes of documents, which is why you are seeing thousands [of] junior associates laid off").

•Despite these changes, a recent study by the American Bar Foundation and NALP Foundation for Law Career Research and Education reported more than 70 percent of lawyers were moderately or very satisfied with their career decision. As the ABA Journal reports, Harvard Law School professor David Wilkins says, "Satisfaction is a blunt instrument, but the portrait of widespread misery is wildly exaggerated.”

Listen to our podcast "The Current Economic Environment: What It Means for Law School Applicants & Students" to hear more on this topic.

Attitude Problems on the LSAT

Attitude questions — you know, those mildly irritating ones that pretty much ask you how the author feels about something — may be the trickiest questions on the Reading Comp section of the test. If only those authors would just come out and say how they felt about the topic (I think that Yeats’ poetry is crap)! Luckily for us, these attitudes do come across loud and clear, as long as you know what types of language to look for.

Here are some things to keep in mind:

1. Eliminate any answer choice with the words indifferent or neutral—if the author didn’t feel anything about the subject, the LSAT writers wouldn’t be asking the question.

2. Check out the adjectives and adverbs that describe the topic: are these mostly positive (comprehensive, informative, insightful, etc) or negative (disappointing, unfortunate, incomplete)?

3. Check out the verbs that are associated with the topic. Does the author say that it attempts, succeeds, or fails at anything?

4. Unless your findings are OVERWHELMINGLY positive or STAGGERINGLY negative, eliminate extreme answer choices (outright disdain, ardent admiration, unmitigated criticism, unconditional acceptance, etc).

Let’s take a look at this excerpt to see if we can figure what the author’s attitude toward Koons’s study is:

Koons’s study provides one of the more enlightening accounts of the Great Migration. Unfortunately, it fails to fully address the reaction of Northern whites to this sudden influx of African Americans.

Okay, so the author describes the study as one of the more enlightening accounts. That’s pretty positive! However, he then adds a negative qualification: it unfortunately fails to fully address something. So, the author has a somewhat positive attitude about Koons’s study. We’ll keep this in mind as we go through the answer choices:

A. Enthusiastic reverence

This is an extreme answer choice. We know that the author feels positively about Koons’s study, but we also know that he has some reservations about it. So this one is out.

B. Complete indifference
This choice claims the author doesn’t have an opinion on the subject—we can eliminate it right off the bat.

C. Qualified rejection
This suggests that the author’s attitude is mostly negative, but we know the author’s feelings are generally positive.

D. Reserved admiration
There’s our correct answer! The author shows admiration for the study (it is one of the more enlightening accounts.) We know this admiration is reserved, because the author points out one of the study’s unfortunate shortcomings (it fails to fully address…)

E. Pointed skepticism
Here’s another extreme answer choice. Plus, it’s overwhelming negative, while we know the author has somewhat positive feelings about the study.

Emily Holleman is a Content Developer at Knewton, helping students with their LSAT preparation. Law School Podcaster listeners can use a promo code to receive a discount on the Knewton LSAT course.

For more information about the LSAT, check out our podcasts "The LSAT: Everything You Need to Know About the Test," and "Comparing LSAT Test Prep Companies".

When Choosing a Law School, Think Regionally!

One sound bite I use a lot when counseling prospective law students is to "put the end at the beginning." Before thinking about program specialties and clinical opportunities and academic profiles and acceptances rates and anything else that might determine your selection of law schools to which you will apply, think about the end game. Picture graduating, taking the bar, and going off to work. Seriously, do it, even if it feels weird.

The reason it might feel weird is because the law school process is very insular, especially compared to other graduate professional programs like medical school and business school. Just look at the applications: MBA and MD programs ask students specifically about their career goals and prospects, while law schools simply present a personal statement that allows you to write about whatever you want (and in most cases, you should be writing about something besides career goals). Even the process by which law schools admit students is focused entirely on what will make for a good law student - almost no thought is given to whether the candidate will make for a good lawyer one day. So law school applicants can be forgiven when they lose sight of the end game (the legal profession), choosing instead to focus entirely on the law school part of the equation.

Part of putting the end at the beginning is understanding career prospects and the recruitment process that while occur while in school. Law school is very hierarchical in the sense that attending a top school can lead to an easier path to prestigious job opportunities. Attending a truly elite school can often take some of the pressure off of finding a BigLaw job and it has the added benefit of creating a truly national job search. Virtually everyone attends on campus interviewing processes at programs like Harvard, Columbia, and Chicago, and while some firms are cutting back on their level of recruitment, graduates of elite institutes can still expect to meet with recruiters from law firms based all over. A Chicago grad will not only receive the opportunity to meet with Chicago-based firms, but also firms based in other cities, major market branches, and even satellite offices. When I interviewed during OCI (on campus interviewing) at Chicago in the fall of 2005, over 25 L.A. firms were on the docket.

However, the harsh reality is that most law students will not have the chance to attend a top five, ten, or even "T-14" law school and the even harsher reality is that the current legal recruiting climate is narrowing the options available to students and graduates. All of which puts a premium on planning ahead and thinking about which city you want to work in when you graduate. If you can't go to one of the truly national law schools (a group that is growing smaller every year), then you simply have to consider the regional recruiting implications of your school selection process. Emory is a fine law school but you won't find 25 firms from Los Angeles on campus for recruiting and you won't even find that many from New York. D.C., sure, but expect a heavy dose of Atlanta. Students at Texas can expect to see a lot of firms from Texas. George Washington grads are going to get most of their offers from D.C. area firms. This is just the way things tend to work when the job search becomes more regional in nature.

Once students understand this basic consideration, the next question becomes obvious: "What region of the country do I want to live and work in?" For many, the answer is easy - they want to be close to family, to return to their roots, be near a spouse's job, and so on. For other students, however, the possibilities are endless. They can and will go anywhere for the "right" opportunity. Usually, that means going to the school they perceive to be the best. However, let me offer another regional consideration, one that puts the end at the beginning: think about the value of law firm employment.

Assuming you go on to study law at a regional school, have access to regional recruiters, and land a job with a law firm in that region, you are going to be looking at some basic factors that speak to the value of that work experience. For instance, practicing law in New York is known to pay the biggest bonuses, but also demand (often by far) the longest hours. It is not uncommon to hear of junior associates billing 2,400 hours a year. And while the bonuses may be bigger in the Big Apple, the base salaries are often similar to those in other major markets. Consider that cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, and D.C. all pay "New York salaries" yet have cultures with lower billable hours. There are certainly still sweatshops in those cities and you must pick a firm carefully, but billing a lot of hours in L.A. or Chicago looks more like 2,100 than 2,400. And the pay is just about the same. So those cities start to look pretty good. And to take it a step further, you can easily research cost of living and see that Chicago is an absolute steal compared to Los Angeles (and, of course, New York).

So if you are a law school applicant considering "regional" schools in New York, L.A., and Chicago, you also want to consider the value of your job when you graduate. For pure return on investment, Chicago blows the other two cities out of the water. This analysis also extends to somewhat smaller markets like Portland, Dallas, and Denver - firms don't pay quite the same salaries, but the billable hour requirements are usually far lower and the cost of living is a fraction of the bigger markets.

Obviously, the ability to secure employment in the first place and to do so at a firm that allows for interesting work and a good environment for professional development is all necessary for any sort of value calculation to do any good. But when you are looking at regions of the country to practice law, don't just think about the schools themselves or which city you might want to live in for three years - really think long and hard about where you can get the most value out of your legal practice once you graduate. Where you go geographically will make all the difference when it comes to maximizing the return on your significant investment.

Adam Hoff is the Director of Admissions Consulting and Research at Veritas Prep. He is a graduate of the University of Chicago Law School and Pepperdine University, where he served as the Associate Director of Admissions. Adam oversees Veritas Prep’s law school admissions consulting services to ensure that Veritas Prep clients are successfully poised for admission to their select law schools. You can hear more from Adam on strategic tips for your law school application in the Law School Podcaster episodes, Law School Application Strategy: What You Can Do Now To Help You Get Accepted and "Law School Personal Statements and Letters of Recommendation: Where to Begin?"

How a Campus Visit Can Help Your Chances of "Getting Off the Waitlist"

Our latest podcast, "Getting Off the Waitlist," takes a look at what the waitlist means, how law schools use the list and what waitlisted students can do to get that spot in the entering class. One thing waitlisted applicants can do is visit campus and use the visit to strategically promote their candidacy. Cornell Law School Dean of Admissions, Richard Geiger explains what this means at Cornell. "At Cornell we’re a little bit different from other places because we actually invite them to have an interview so we offer up an interview and that’s something that if somebody is on our waiting list, I strongly encourage them to take us up on that offer.”

Not every school will grant you an interview if you are waitlisted, but they may still welcome your visit. For example, on March 1, 2009, the Admissions Office at The University of Chicago Law School sent out this message to wait listed applicants via Twitter: "Waitlisted applicants are always welcome to visit & we are happy to answer questions, but we do not set up appointments or grant interviews."

Even without an interview, a campus visit can still help a waitlisted applicant. Clear Admit's Graham Richmond notes that a visit can provide you with concrete examples of why a school is your top choice, and those examples can help form a strong basis for articulating your reasons to the school itself in a letter expressing your "continued interest" in the school. “I think that it is actually a really great idea, even before you send in the letter of continued interest, to go to campus and then when you go to write your letter about why you’re interested in this program and why it’s the perfect fit for you, you’re going to have so many great data points to draw upon and people whose names you can mention that you spoke with."

Ann Levine, Founder of LawSchoolExpert.com has this advice: "Line up that quality face time at the school you want to attend. “You know, let the Admission Office know you’re there, you’re coming, and you want to sit in on a class, be professional, talk to the students who are sitting around you. Talk to the students who are hanging out on the quad, get names of people, follow up with them, introduce yourself to the professor whose class you’re sitting in on. If you have an area that you really have a demonstrated interest and expertise in, find the professor at that school that shares that expertise that you would want to work with and study with and contact that person."

William J. Hoye, Associate Dean of Admissions and Student Affairs advises waitlisted applicants to send "a carefully crafted note to us that expresses your interest with some detail."

While "details" include new developments and information about yourself, they can also include those concrete pieces of information you gain through a visit to campus.

Tune into the full show to hear more strategies for "Getting Off the Waitlist."

Brain Game Time: Another Logic Games Challenge

Atlas LSAT posted Logic Games Challenge #22 and they invite our listeners to join in: Poetry

The LSA group of students in a poetry class is being assigned readings. Each of three students – Francis, Grace, and Hu – will read at least one of four poems – Walkabout, Xtravagance, Yonder Cloudbreak, and Zoolandia.

• No student reads both Yonder Cloudbreak and Zoolandia.
• Hu reads more poems than Grace and Francis.
• Any student that reads Xtravagance also reads Walkabout.
• Any poem that is read by Francis is also read by Grace.

1. Which of the following could be a complete and accurate list of the poems read by the students?
A. Francis: Xtravagance, Walkabout; Grace: Xtravagance, Walkabout, Yonder Cloudbreak;
Hu: Walkabout, Yonder Cloudbreak
B. Francis: Walkabout, Xtravagance; Grace: Walkabout, Yonder Cloudbreak; Hu:
Walkabout, Xtravagance, Yonder Cloudbreak
C. Francis: Walkabout; Grace: Walkabout, Xtravagance; Hu: Yonder Cloudbreak, Zoolandia
D. Francis: Yonder Cloudbreak; Grace: Yonder Cloudbreak; Hu: Walkabout, Xtravagance
E. Francis: Walkabout; Grace: Walkabout; Hu: Xtravagance, Yonder Cloudbreak

2. Which of the following must be true?
A. Grace reads more poems than Francis.
B. If Grace reads Xtravagance, Francis reads Xtravagance.
C. If Francis reads Xtravagance, Grace reads Walkabout.
D. If Hu reads Yonder Cloudbreak, Francis and Grace do not.
E. If Hu reads Zoolandia, Francis and Grace do not.

3. If Hu does not read Yonder Cloudbreak or Zoolandia, then all of the following could be true
EXCEPT:
A. Francis reads Zoolandia.
B. Grace reads Yonder Cloudbreak.
C. All three students read Walkabout.
D. Exactly two students read Zoolandia.
E. Exactly two students read Xtravagance.

4. Which of the following must be true?
A. Francis cannot read Xtravagance unless Hu does.
B. Francis and Grace always read at least one poem that Hu reads.
C. Hu can only read Zoolandia if Grace does not.
D. Hu can read three poems only if Francis reads two poems.
E. Zoolandia can be read by at most two students.

5. If every poem is read by at least one student, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
A. At least one poem is read by all three students.
B. Francis reads exactly the same poems as Grace.
C. Grace reads more poems than Francis.
D. Francis and Hu read two of the same poems.
E. Xtravagance is read by either Francis or Grace.

And this next one is more slog than you might want…

6. How many different ways can the poems be assigned such that each poem is read by at least
one student?
A. 4
B. 5
C. 6
D. 7
E. 8

Think you have the answers? E-mail them to logicmaster@atlaslsat.com. First person to submit the correct answers wins a $25 Amazon gift card. The best explanation posted on Atlas LSAT Forums wins $25 as well.

Answers to Logic Games Challenge #21: (1)E (2)B (3)E (4)C (5)B (6)A (7)D

For more information about the LSAT, check out Law School Podcaster's full show "The LSAT: Everything You Need to Know About the Test." To hear directly from LSAT test preparation providers about study options, tune in to "Comparing LSAT Test Prep Companies: Which One is Right for You?"

Waitlisted? Listen Up!!

As the admissions season rolls on, many of you are playing the waiting game. Waiting to hear back from law schools, waiting to see if you got in or if you've been rejected. But what if your wait ends with a waitlist? Does that just mean MORE waiting??

Listen to our show on Getting off the Waitlist: How to Improve Your Chances of Getting Accepted.

You'll learn what things you should and shouldn't do while WAITING on the waitlist!

You'll hear from these experts to help you plan your strategy:
• Richard Geiger, Associate Dean and Dean of Admissions, Cornell Law School
• William J. Hoye, Associate Dean of Admissions and Student Affairs, Duke University School of Law
• Graham Richmond, Founder and CEO of Clear Admit
• Ann Levine, Owner of LawSchoolExpert.com and author of The Law School Admission Game: Play Like An Expert.

If you've managed to get off the waitlist, please send us your story to info@lawschoolpodcaster.com.

More Law School Faculty to Love...and Pay For

Sounds pretty good, right? A lower faculty-to-student ratio and improved faculty scholarship. But all that comes at a price -- one paid by law students in the form of higher tuition. According to a recent National Jurist post previewing a study about to be released later this month, "the average law school increased its faculty size by 40 percent over the past 10 years."

"This increase in staffing accounts for 48 percent of the tuition increase from 1998 to 2008, the study shows. Tuition increased by 74percent at private schools and a 102 percent at public institutions from 1998 to 2008."

The National Jurist reports that "the dramatic increases are related to two things — an increased need for specialization and the U.S. News & World Report rankings of law schools." William Henderson, a law professor at Indiana University Mauer School of Law said, “Law schools tend to believe that their faculty reputation is driven by scholarship and they are very interested in U.S. News.” He suggests that “Lowering your faculty-to-student ratio improves your [U.S. News] ranking and increases time for scholarship.”

Some stats to note:

• Professors are spending less time in the classroom; the typical teaching load has dropped from five courses a few generations ago to three courses today.

• From 1998 until 2008, the number of law faculty at 195 ABA-accredited law schools grew from 12,200 to 17,080 — a 40 percent increase. A subset of that total, the number of deans, librarians and other full-time administrators who teach more than tripled — from 528 to 1,059.

• While part of this increase was in part-time faculty, that category grew at a lower pace— 33 percent — than full-time faculty.

• All of this has lowered the average student-to-faculty ratio from 18.5-to-1 in 1998 to 14.9-to-1 in 2008. It was an estimated 25.5-to-1 in 1988 and 29-to-1 in 1978. In other words, there are twice as many law professors per student today as there were 30 years ago.

So, is this too much of a good thing or is increased faculty size making legal education better?

Hear more about the factors that affect where you want to go to law school in our podcast "Choosing the Right Law School" and be sure to check out our podcast "Financing Your JD: How to Pay for Law School" for more information on this topic.

Optimistic Outlook for In-House Hiring of Lawyers

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports on "a breath of spring in a job market that’s been wintry for far too long." Given our recent post documenting the latest dismal numbers for law firm hiring of law students, it's refreshing to hear from the Association of Corporate Counsel’s (ACC) 10th Annual Chief Legal Officer Survey that things seem to be looking up for hiring of in-house lawyers.

According to the ACC survey, the outlook for Chief Legal Officers is showing signs of optimism, with increased job satisfaction and internal hiring plans for 2010.

Some key points to note from the survey:

• Uptick in hiring/staffing: There was a greater focus on internal hiring in legal departments, as well as an increase in corporate attorneys outside the U.S. Despite the recession, more than a quarter (29%) of the respondents plan to hire staff for their in-house legal departments in 2010,up from 23% who had hiring plans in last year’s survey.

• Job satisfaction is strong: Even with increased scrutiny and expanded duties, an overwhelming majority of respondents (91%) reported they are still satisfied with their chosen career, up from 88% in 2008.

• Increase in workload, demand for alternative fees and decrease in outside counsel work: Even with this uptick in staffing, the recession has impacted legal departments’ workload, budget and outside counsel spend. More than one-third (34%) of respondents reported a cut in spending on outside counsel, and those who did employ outside counsel used more alternative fee arrangements. (Of course, the downside is that this could mean less work for law firms, and fewer jobs for lawyers and law students at those firms).

While the optimistic outlook for hiring of in-house lawyers is a bright spot on the legal employment horizon, Ashby Jones, Lead Writer of The Wall Street Journal Law Blog notes in his post that, "of course, this doesn’t mean that the floodgates have opened. Nor does it mean that in-house jobs are going to be easy to get."

The increase in in-house hires may just be a glimmer of hope or it could be more of a restructuring caused by the recession, as suggested by ACC deputy general counsel, James Merklinger. Merklinger says in a recent post on Corporate Counsel: "The added hiring most suggests that the recession is forcing chief legal officers to change the way they operate. They're bringing more work in-house, spending less on outside counsel, and boosting spending on alternative fee arrangements, the survey shows."

Still, someone has to get those in-house jobs, right?

Ashby Jones of The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog was a guest on a recent Law School Podcaster segment, “The Current Economic Environment: What It Means for Law School Applicants and Students.” Check out the full show to hear more on this topic.

The Latest Numbers on Recruiting Law Students

It's hardly news, at this point -- we know that law school grads face layoffs, deferrals and increased competition for fewer jobs. Yet somehow the numbers from the fall 2009 recruiting season seem worth noting. As reported in the ABA Journal, the National Association of Law Placement's (NALP) annual Perspectives on Fall Recruiting (PDF) was released Tuesday and, not surprisingly, recruiting volume by U.S. legal employers on law school campuses "nose-dived."

Some key stats to note:

• Summer associates: the median number of offers dropped to seven for 2010 hiring. The median number of offers for students recruited in 2008 was 10, dropping from 15 in 2007, NALP reports.

• At large firms with more than 700 lawyers, offers extended to 2Ls dropped to eight in 2009, down from 18.5 in 2008 and 30 in 2007. And while larger firms of more than 500 lawyers were the most likely to cut back on-campus recruiting efforts, smaller firms with 100 lawyers or fewer were more likely to have kept to their regular on-campus recruiting schedule.

• Acceptance rates were 42.8 percent, the highest ever recorded -- evidence that law students quickly snapped up offers of employment.

• Almost two-thirds of offices reported that their summer program was at least one week shorter than in 2008. Among firms of 251-500 lawyers and 701 or more lawyers, over 70% did so.

• Deferrals were also way up, with 85 percent of law schools reporting that at least one 2009 graduate faced an offer delay well into 2010. NALP estimates that at least 3,200 and as many as 3,700 graduating law students faced deferrals.

• Third-year hiring all but dried up, with just a handful of offices reporting any activity at all, and with those that did typically making 1 or 2 offers. In total, only about 3% of employers reported recruiting any 3L students.

NALP Executive Director, James Leipold, said in a statement about the report, "this represents an enormous interruption in the usual recruiting and employment patterns that we have come to expect.” Leipold noted "the largest impact was the deferral phenomenon" for the Class of 2009.

While many deferred associates have now started to work, deferrals are still present and, NALP expects those who don't have solid start dates at this point will be deferred.

There is, of course, "tremendous variation in legal hiring -- both by region and by individual employer" but these numbers tell a story and NALP doesn't expect big improvement in this picture for the short term. The ABA Journal reports that "NALP expects law school recruiting to continue hobbling along until at least the class of 2012 graduates, "though the worst does now seem, we hope, to be behind us."

NALP's Jim Leipold was a guest on Law School Podcaster's segment, "The Current Economic Environment: What It Means for Law School Applicants & Students." Tune into the full show to hear more on this topic.

In the End, Just a Few Small Changes to Law Firm Recruiting Guidelines

In a recent post, we noted that "change does not come easily to the citizens of Law Firm Land." So no surprise that the board of the National Association of Law Placement (NALP) has, for now, made just two small changes to the law firm summer associate recruiting guidelines: The deadline for students to accept offers will drop from 45 days to 28 days, and the deadline for students who have completed a summer program to accept job offers will move from Nov. 15 to Nov. 1.

The National Law Journal (NLJ) reports that NALP board has backed off the recent NALP recommendation to delay the summer associate offer process by four months -- a proposal that would have initiated a January offer kickoff date for law firm summer associate offers.

Law firm recruiters and law school administrators "largely welcomed" the outcome, reports the NLJ. The NALP proposal to delay law firm summer associate offers to January, met with a chilly reception from many law firms and those involved in law firm hiring.

NALP Executive Director Jim Leipold said that the organization received 800 responses to the proposal since it was unveiled in early January, but there was "no easy consensus or even a trend around one particular idea." Leipold explained that "Law firms and law schools are both conservative and risk-averse institutions. The scope of change was very large and it doesn't surprise me that there was resistance."

NALP's Jim Leipold was a guest on Law School Podcaster's segment, "The Current Economic Environment: What It Means for Law School Applicants & Students." Tune into the full show to hear more on this topic.