Search the Lounge

Categories

« Call For Papers: Workshop For Corporate & Securities Regulation | Main | Milkman, Akinola and Chugh, "A Field Experiment Exploring How Pay and Representation Differentially Shape Bias on the Pathway into Organizations" »

April 24, 2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Anon123

Wow. How rude! At a minimum, the response could have been, we are looking for a Dean to help with these issues (especially bar passage). The class entering in 2013 and those already signed up for 2014 look in much worse shape than the previous classes and I suspect that any additional students placing deposits late in the summer will be even weaker.

ATLprof

My impression is that these schools are run with a very-corporate mindset and culture. So, the stay positive or go home mandate is not too surprising, even though it creates this shocking decision and is objectively outrageous. Those in charge of these schools (i.e. not the faculty) exercise much tighter control and maintain very different cultures than most of us are used to.

anon

ATL

My impression is that your impression is based on conjecture, especially insofar as you seem committed to the view that "those in charge of these schools (i.e. not the faculty)" are solely responsible for the events described here.

The report said the faculty could only eliminate one of the candidates, but alluded to possible faculty input over the selection of the candidates.

Beyond that, are you basing your impression on an impression about Florida Coastal, Arizona Summit and Charlotte (presumably the "these schools" to which you referred)? Are you conversant with the faculty governance at these schools, or any of them, and the dean selection process at each?

Please note, the referenced report did not claim any such comprehensive knowledge.

Shouldn't we reserve judgment until more is known?

Michael C. Duff

No ATL is obviously spot on. No need to reserve judgment in the interest of fake "fair and balanced" assessment. You don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing.

anon

Michael

Are you equally sure that ABA accreditation should be unavailable for "schools"?

anon

"these schools"?

terry malloy

Another example of "Smile or Die" corporate culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo

It's an ugly form of delusion.

anon

Florida Coastal states:

"Florida Coastal School of Law (FCSL) is following an American Bar Association (ABA) compliant search process in which candidates are vetted by faculty and staff. The Search Committee then makes recommendations to the Board of Directors which makes the final decision. ... The selection process follows a typical dean search process as required by the ABA Standards."

ATL and Michael: do you know otherwise? Please be specific.



Alfred L. Brophy

Anon, I am hesitant to wade into this discussion because I don't know the facts. The report Dan links to is troubling and -- if true -- makes me suspicious that the faculty have little input into the process. But I want to ask why, given all the discussion about misrepresentation (or at least lack of full disclosure) by law school administrations, we should take at face value a statement like the one you quote? Are we thinking that self-serving statements from law school administrations are to be taken as truth?

ATLprof

Anon (?):

I based my assessment posted in this thread on a number of things, including knowing many people who have worked and still work within the Infilaw schools.

I was basing my questioning of whether the process met the ABA standards off the ABA Standards and the FCLS dean search (posted in other comment threads) purely on the description of the process in the news reports. More specifically, I was basing it on the reports that the faculty would only be able to eliminate one for the finalists. I questioned whether that met the published interpretation of the relevant standard.

I'm not sure what Michael is trying to say - whether he is trying to be sarcastic or not. I can understand how people who have no knowledge of the workings of law schools or of for-profit law schools or of Infilaw schools and are only working off the admittedly scant second-hand news report may want to reserve judgment.

anon

Alfred:

My point in quoting FCSL's statement on compliance with the ABA standards was this:

If ATL and Michael know that FCSL's assertion concerning compliance with ABA standards is false, then I would be interested in the basis for this knowledge.

ATL states:

"I can understand how people who have no knowledge of the workings of law schools or of for-profit law schools or of Infilaw schools and are only working off the admittedly scant second-hand news report may want to reserve judgment."

ATL thus appears to claim superior knowledge about this incident (stating, in addition to presumed superior knowledge about “the working of law schools” in general, “I based my assessment posted in this thread on a number of things, including knowing many people who have worked and still work within the Infilaw schools). And ATL seems to suggest that ATL has information beyond the cited report that those who “have NO knowledge” of “law schools” don’t. (Michael heard a line in a Bob Dylan song, and believes, presumably, quoting it suffices.)

Yet, ATL also states, “I was basing my questioning of whether the process met the ABA standards off the ABA Standards and the FCLS dean search (posted in other comment threads) purely on the description of the process in the news reports.”

So, we’re left with ATL’s conjecture about this incident based on nothing more than what was known by all the poor souls who don’t possess ATS’s superior knowledge. In this thread, ATL’s expressions were fairly limited and generalized, and did not and do not particularly merit any comment, but in that earlier thread to which ATL refers, ATL said this:

“It wasn't faculty that expelled or even objected. They, by what little information has come out to date, seem to have almost no real input in the process (in what appears to be a violation of the relevant ABA standard to me). The expelling of the candidate appears to be the action of ownership or their representative.”

For one, I asked ATL for the basis for the last made statement (“The expelling of the candidate appears to be the action of ownership or their representative”) and I asked whether ATL was basing that statement on an impression about Florida Coastal, Arizona Summit and Charlotte (the "Infilaw" schools). I also noted that the cited report indicated that "[The expulsion of a candidate] happened in the view of about 40 faculty and staff present at this presentation, which was being recorded so others who were teaching class could see it later."

Honestly, I could see this developing that ATL is perfectly correct and that faculty were neither complacent or complicit in the expulsion. Perhaps ATL is correct that faculty did not even “object” to the candidate’s presentation. But, until we have more information, can we say for sure that “the expelling of the candidate appears to be the action of ownership or their representative”?

If so, please let us know the basis for this statement of fact, beyond a negative opinion of “for-profit law schools or of Infilaw schools.” Is it inconceivable that there is more to the incident than ATL knows or has stated? One would think so.

Finally, if ATL and Michael are positive that FCSL has violated ABA standards, I, for one, would be very interested to hear them state a proposed remedy for this alleged violation.

The comments to this entry are closed.

StatCounter

  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad