CSOL versus Infilaw: side-by-side comparisons
-
Upload
probonopopuli -
Category
Documents
-
view
672 -
download
0
description
Transcript of CSOL versus Infilaw: side-by-side comparisons
Select Comparisons:Charleston School of Law versusInfilaw Schools
September 27, 2013
CHARLESTONSCHOOL OF LAW
ALUMNI ASSOCIATION
PRO BONO POPULIfor the good of the people
i
Select Comparisons Between Charleston School of Law and Infilaw Schools Prepared by: Charleston School of Law Alumni Association Last Updated: September 27, 2013
Methodology: All of the information presented in this report was derived from the self-reported data submitted to the ABA by each school, respectively. This was the best way to compare and contrast the schools’ respective statistics. Unless otherwise specified, the years referenced in the data refer to the year of publication of the data, not the year of collection of the data. Thus, data tagged “2014” may actually have been collected by each school in 2011. This detracts from the usefulness to student consumers of reviewing a single year’s ABA report; but by comparing the data over a period of years, useful trends, patterns, and conclusions emerge. In some cases, for the benefit of visual clarity, data from the Charleston School of Law has been compared to an average of the data collected from the Infilaw Schools. All data compiled for each school is appended to the end of this report.
Sources: Current ABA school reports are available at http://officialguide.lsac.org. Prior ABA school reports are archived online at http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/publications/official-guide-archives. NALP reports are available only for the current year at http://www.nalplawschoolsonline.org. While the NALP data did not form the basis of any of the charts contained herein, because they present a nearly real-time snapshot of enrollment data for each school, they are a helpful resource for anyone wishing to learn more. ABA employment data is available at http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org
1
1L Enrollment:
Each of the Infilaw schools is significantly bigger than the Charleston School of Law in terms of enrollment. While both Phoenix School of Law and Charlotte School of Law opened their doors after CSOL did, both schools have 1L enrollments that are roughly double that of the Charleston School of Law.
This size differential raises important questions:
What are appropriate enrollment numbers for the Charleston School of Law?
What factors should trigger increases in enrollment?
If the Charleston School of Law were to significantly increase its enrollment, how would it address the space issues within the relatively small footprint of the Charleston peninsula?
How would pressure to increase enrollments at Charleston School of Law affect the school’s admissions criteria and selectivity?
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 580 671 808 722 643 620 638
Phoenix 447 450 392 272 200 91 0
Charlo9e 626 529 468 276 138 0 0
Charleston 174 224 237 241 220 205 196
580
671
808
722
643 620
638
174
224 237 241 220 205 196
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2
1L Academic Attrition:
Students leave law school for a variety of reasons—they transfer to other schools, determine they do not wish to practice law, have medical or family emergencies, or decide law school is simply no longer their desired path. But leaving law school due to academic attrition— that is, leaving school for failing to meet academic standards—can have some of the most devastating personal and economic consequences: student loans must begin to be repaid as soon as students are no longer in school, and re-admission is often difficult, if not impossible, leaving students with little to show for their efforts other than debt. In recent years, due to decreased enrollments, law schools around the country have been reporting downward pressure on admissions standards like the LSAT and undergraduate GPA. So it is not surprising that academic attrition might begin to increase. But the contrast between the academic attrition at Infilaw schools versus the Charleston School of Law over the last few years shows, CSOL’s rate of attrition remaining low, while Infilaw’s has continued to creep up to alarming levels. At 10% attrition, with average 1L enrollments around 500 students, that means an average of 50 students per school per year fails out of law school in the first year.
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Infilaw Average 10% 8% 8% 6% 8% 7% 12%
Charleston 1.8% 1.3% 1.7% 1.3% 1.8% 1.0% 0.0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
Infilaw Average Charleston
3
1L Median LSAT:
As noted in the previous section, schools around the country have faced considerable downward pressure on admissions standards as applications to law schools have dropped off over the last few years. Clearly both the Charleston School of Law and Infilaw schools have experienced this drop off, but the Infilaw drop-off appears to have been steeper. These numbers raise important questions, some of which will not be able to be answered for several more years, given the lag between data reporting regarding admission to law school and the bar examination:
How will a school’s decrease in admissions standards correlate to the bar passage rates of its graduates?
Will an increase in 1L enrollment, i f any, at the Charleston School of Law result in further downward pressure on admissions standards?
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Charleston 151 152 154 153 153 154 154
Infilaw Average 146 148 149 151 150 152 151
144
146
148
150
152
154
4
Diversity—among 1Ls versus graduates:
Among Infilaw’s most powerful arguments for its admissions “algorithm” and strategy is that it opens its doors to historically underserved communities. And when the Charleston School of Law is compared to Infilaw on percentages of minority students1—whether for 1Ls or graduates, Infilaw clearly does come out ahead. But while Infilaw’s minority enrollment is admirable, the comparison made here—between minority enrollment in the 1L year, versus minority percentages among graduates—raises a troubling question:
What accounts for the significant discrepancy between the rates of 1L minority enrollment at Infi law schools, versus the rates of minority graduation?
1 For the purposes of this comparison, “minority” is interpreted in the way the ABA interprets it, to included all people of Hispanic, Native American, Asian, African American, Pacific Islander, or mixed race heritage.
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
Infilaw: minoriFes as percentage of 1Ls
Infilaw: minoriFes as percentage of graduates
Charleston: minoriFes as percentage of 1Ls
Charleston: minoriFes as percentage of graduates
5
How many students really graduate?
Among the alumni’s chief concerns is that for students as consumers. Students want to know that if they start law school, they will finish law school. Because full-time students ordinarily finish law school in three years, absent significant enrollment fluxuations or part-time student populations, we might expect to see graduates numbering roughly one-third of a school’s total enrollment each year. And yet, at the Infilaw schools—which have significantly smaller percentages of their students participating part-time than Charleston—those graduate numbers have hovered between 15 and 23% for the last few years. Charleston, on the other hand has had numbers much more in line with what would be expected for on-time graduation rates. This raises worrisome questions:
Why do so few of Infi law’s students graduate each year? How long does it actually take to graduate from an Infi law school?
36%
28% 26%
24%
28%
31%
0%
22%
16% 15%
17% 17%
23% 22%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
Charleston JDs awarded as percentage of total enrollment
Infilaw JDs awarded as percentage of total enrollment
6
Full-time, permanent employment as lawyers:
By and large, law students go to law schools because they want to be lawyers. So when evaluating the claims of law schools make about their employment statistics, students want to know how many graduates at each school are employed full-time as lawyers within the first year after law school. While the legal job market has been difficult throughout the United States during and since the recession, the job prospects for students at the Charleston School of law were clearly significantly better in 2011 and 2012 than those for students at Infilaw Schools.
Charleston 50.78%
Charleston 53.71%
Charlo9e 43.30%
Charlo9e 37.61%
Phoenix 36.64%
Phoenix 43.65%
Florida Coastal 36.14%
Florida Coastal 35.88%
0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00%
2011 Rate
2012 Rate
7
SELECTED ENROLLMENT, GRADUATION & EMPLOYMENT DATA
1L Academic Attrition School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 12% 11% 9% 8% 16% 11% 12% Phoenix 4% 5% 7% 7% 4% 3% n/a
Charlotte 13.5% 9.6% 7.6% 4.3% 4.8% n/a n/a Infilaw Average 10% 8% 8% 6% 8% 7% 12%
Charleston 1.8% 1.3% 1.7% 1.3% 1.8% 1.0% 0.0%
1L Median LSAT
School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 146 147 149 150 150 151 151 Phoenix 145 148 150 151 151 153 n/a
Charlotte 146 148 149 151 150 n/a n/a Infilaw Average 146 148 149 151 150 152 151
Charleston 151 152 154 153 153 154 154
Diversity: minorities as percentage of graduates School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 27.1% 25.4% 23.3% 20.3% 12.2% 12.1% 12.2% Phoenix 19.9% 24.4% 20.3% 20.3% 11.8% n/a n/a
Charlotte 18.4% 11.2% 12.3% 14.1% n/a n/a n/a Infilaw: minorities as
percentage of graduates 21.8% 20.3% 18.7% 18.2% 12.0% 12.1% 12.2% Charleston: minorities as percentage of graduates 8.7% 10.7% 4.9% 3.8% 4.7% 5.9% n/a
Diversity: minorities as percentage of 1Ls School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 37% 33.7% 32.3% 31.1% 26.2% 24.1% 23.7% Phoenix 43.1% 33.5% 21.9% 19.8% 22.4% 22.0% n/a
Charlotte 39.9% 33.2% 23.8% 19.6% 16.7% n/a n/a Infilaw: minorities as
percentage of 1Ls 40.0% 33.5% 26.0% 23.5% 21.7% 23.1% 23.7% Charleston: minorities as
percentage of 1Ls 10.9% 13.0% 11.4% 7.5% 10.1% 8.7% 6.6%
8
JDs Awarded as percentage of total enrollment School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 32% 26% 25% 26% 23% 23% 22% Phoenix 17% 13.5% 10% 11% 10% n/a n/a
Charlotte 17% 8.5% 10% 13% n/a n/a n/a
Infilaw JDs awarded as percentage of total enrollment 22% 16% 15% 17% 17% 23% 22%
Charleston JDs awarded as percentage of total enrollment 36% 28% 26% 24% 28% 31% n/a
Percentage of students enrolled "full-time" School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 86.0% 97.1% 96.6% 95.9% 89.0% 88.2% 83.4% Phoenix 68.2% 71.9% 71.0% 65.5% 58.3% 53.1% n/a
Charlotte 83.9% 82.8% 82.4% 79.0% 78.3% n/a n/a
Infilaw percentage of students enrolled full-‐time 79.4% 83.9% 83.3% 80.1% 75.2% 70.7% 83.4%
Charleston percentage of students enrolled full-‐time 70.0% 73.1% 74.1% 69.7% 70.0% 66.7% 56.2%
Entering class size School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Florida 580 671 808 722 643 620 638 Phoenix 447 450 392 272 200 91 0
Charlotte 626 529 468 276 138 0 0 Charleston 174 224 237 241 220 205 196
9
Tuition School 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
Florida Coastal 39370 36968 34712 32662 30816 28870 27088 Phoenix 39,533 37,764 36,036 34,396 31,562 28,640
Charlotte 38,606 36,916 34,990 33,166 29,968 Charleston 37,874 36,774 35,606 34,618 32,970 30,598 28,680
Full-time employment as lawyers
School 2011 2012 Charleston 50.78% 53.71% Charlotte 43.30% 37.61% Phoenix 36.64% 43.65%
Florida Coastal 36.14% 35.88%