<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Not Covered By LSAT Prep</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/</link>
	<description>David Randall&#039;s blog of law, the Internet, and current events</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 02:17:08 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mac Law Students &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Is Law School (in the U.S.) Worth It?</title>
		<link>http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/comment-page-1/#comment-5943</link>
		<dc:creator>Mac Law Students &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Is Law School (in the U.S.) Worth It?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/#comment-5943</guid>
		<description>[...] Not Covered by LSAT Prep [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Not Covered by LSAT Prep [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik Schmidt</title>
		<link>http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/comment-page-1/#comment-5938</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik Schmidt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trudalane.net/2007/09/26/not-covered-by-lsat-prep/#comment-5938</guid>
		<description>You wrote: &quot;I can empathize with the disappointment these folks face but a law degree has never been a guaranteed ticket to fortune.&quot;

I think everyone is agreement on that point, and you&#039;re correct in noting that students who feel betrayed by their law schools are barking up the wrong tree.

However, the real problem isn&#039;t that students can&#039;t &quot;make a fortune,&quot; it&#039;s that they can&#039;t make a salary that can pay back their loans. I submit that a huge percentage of law students aren&#039;t interested in becoming rich. Is a profession that eats its young really in good health?

You also write: &quot;If you can’t assess and accept the risks of spending three years and $150,000 to earn a law degree there is a simple and cheap two-word solution: Don’t Go.&quot;

I respectfully submit that such a statement may be easier to make in retrospect than prospectively. According to your bio, you graduated in 1981.

N. William Hines notes in his article: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aals.org/services_newsletter_presAug05.php&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Ten Major Changes in Legal Education Over the Past 25 Years&lt;/a&gt;:

&quot;In 1980 obtaining a legal education was not particularly expensive compared to other types of graduate-level training, and law tuitions were not appreciably higher than tuitions charged undergraduates or candidates for masters degrees. As a result, most law students graduated from law school with little or no debt. Over the past 25 years the costs of providing a quality legal education have escalated much more rapidly than average wages and general inflation, and law tuitions have climbed even faster.&quot;

In the current job market, where a bachelor&#039;s degree doesn&#039;t mean what it used to, the pressure to obtain an advanced degree is stronger than ever. The fact that law school has become such a risky proposition says as much about the legal profession as it does about law students.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You wrote: &#8220;I can empathize with the disappointment these folks face but a law degree has never been a guaranteed ticket to fortune.&#8221;</p>
<p>I think everyone is agreement on that point, and you&#8217;re correct in noting that students who feel betrayed by their law schools are barking up the wrong tree.</p>
<p>However, the real problem isn&#8217;t that students can&#8217;t &#8220;make a fortune,&#8221; it&#8217;s that they can&#8217;t make a salary that can pay back their loans. I submit that a huge percentage of law students aren&#8217;t interested in becoming rich. Is a profession that eats its young really in good health?</p>
<p>You also write: &#8220;If you can’t assess and accept the risks of spending three years and $150,000 to earn a law degree there is a simple and cheap two-word solution: Don’t Go.&#8221;</p>
<p>I respectfully submit that such a statement may be easier to make in retrospect than prospectively. According to your bio, you graduated in 1981.</p>
<p>N. William Hines notes in his article: <a href="http://www.aals.org/services_newsletter_presAug05.php" rel="nofollow">Ten Major Changes in Legal Education Over the Past 25 Years</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;In 1980 obtaining a legal education was not particularly expensive compared to other types of graduate-level training, and law tuitions were not appreciably higher than tuitions charged undergraduates or candidates for masters degrees. As a result, most law students graduated from law school with little or no debt. Over the past 25 years the costs of providing a quality legal education have escalated much more rapidly than average wages and general inflation, and law tuitions have climbed even faster.&#8221;</p>
<p>In the current job market, where a bachelor&#8217;s degree doesn&#8217;t mean what it used to, the pressure to obtain an advanced degree is stronger than ever. The fact that law school has become such a risky proposition says as much about the legal profession as it does about law students.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
