Concord Law School

Dr. J April 25, 2008 at 9:24 p.m.

Not fake at all. the future in education is here. prepare to make changes. ABA will change mind in the future.

Carolina Law May 29, 2008 at 6:17 a.m.

Unless you live in CA don't waste your time. You can't even sit for the bar in the rest of the states.

Jesus August 2, 2008 at 11:09 p.m.

Just move to California, its sunny, and the weather is nicer than most of the USA anyway. For me its perfect its full of illegal aliens who need an immigration atty, as well as people who get in trouble with the law all the time.

Carolina Law November 21, 2008 at 10:02 a.m.

Bill said "The credits earned here WILL transfer ANYWHERE, You should not be in college, high school maybe, start slow aye."

They won't transfer to any ABA accredited school which is the only place you would transfer them. It is a joke of a law school. ABA is the standard for a reason.

Carolina Law November 21, 2008 at 10:40 a.m.

Oh yeah, almost forgot to mention it costs a fortune to take the bar. It would be a real shame if you first waste tens of thousands on Concord then waste thousands more trying to pass a bar you are ill prepared to take.

Think first...

Peter December 5, 2008 at 12:15 a.m.

I found the instruction at Concord to be quite good as far as it went. By that I mean the curriculum focused mostly on teaching the law and not so much on teaching lawyering skills (although there was some of that too). Concord uses many of the same texts and curriculums as Bar accredited schools do, so if you do the work you will learn the law. You will have some gaps in your skills, but the graduates who do pass the bar and find attorney jobs (a select crowd to be sure) do say that those gaps are filled in quickly on the job. What Concord does not tell you up front (or at least not when I started 5-6 years ago) is what your odds of complete success are (which I define as "finding employment as an attorney"). The school has only been producing graduates for about 7 years so they have held off on publishing a complete set of statistics. From what I can tell though, of those that start at Concord only about 15-20% will get a JD degree and only about 30% of those degree earners will pass the Cal Bar (the pass rate for Concord grads who take the Bar is around 35%, but not all JD grads take the Bar - don't ask me why). My numbers are based on observations and anecdotes and not hard data but my ESTIMATE is that only 5-8% of those who start will pass the Cal Bar. Of those, maybe 15-20% will find jobs as attorneys. So that means less than one percent of those who enter Concord on day one will be working as attorneys 4-6 years later. I am a graduate of Concord and passed the Cal Bar so this is not a case of sour grapes (maybe squashed grapes, but not sour ones). It is difficult to secure an attorney job coming from a traditional law school, it is even harder to get one coming from a non traditional school like Concord. People have done it, but you need to ask yourself before starting, "am I in the top 1-2% of the class of people who would try this." Also, if you do not live in CA, or plan to move there, I would not try this program. Even if you can pass the Cal Bar, there are very few states that will allow you to take their Bar after having attended Concord (Wisconsin and Vermont may be exceptions, Washington may also allow it if you have practiced first in Cal or some such arrangement). So your employment prospect will be even dimmer if you are not living in Cal (yes, there are a few Concord grads who work as attorneys outside of California). As for the notion that you can practice in Federal Court pro hac vice in any state once you pass the Cal Bar, that is a stretch. While it may be technically true, the common practice is to be a member of the State Bar of the state in which the Federal Court you wish to practice in resides. To summarize, if you are thinking about trying this you need to be ready to work extremely hard, know that the odds are against you from day one, and be willing to move to California if you should defy those odds and pass the Bar. Then and only then do you get to look for work in a state with 200,000 attorneys.

Peter December 16, 2008 at 11:04 p.m.

The First Year Law Student's Exam (Baby Bar) is simply a consumer protection put in place by the Cal Bar. The protection, however, is for the Law Student, not the eventual consumer of legal services. The purpose of the FYLSE exam is to identify students who will likely not be able to pass the regular Bar, therey allowing them to discontinue their law studies before wasting two more years of tuition. Any first year JD student can take the exam, only those from non ABA or non Cal Bar accredited schools are required to take it. However, plenty of law grads from ABA accredited schools end up not passing the Cal Bar (maybe as many as 20%). I bet they now wished their school had REQUIRED them to the take the FYLSE (like Concord does),so they wouldn't have wasted two more years in law school only to find out they are unable to pass the Bar. The barrier to entry into the legal field should be the Bar Exam, not the name of your school. If the barrier to entry is too low, then increase the rigor of the Bar Exam; don't use artificial criteria like ABA accredidation as a barrier to entry into the profession.

Justice1 January 14, 2009 at 3:55 a.m.

To Carolina Law:

I am an attorney in Ca and can tell you first hand that the ABA "IS" right now in the process of changing their policies on law schools such as Concord. Over the past few years Concord has caught the attention of the ABA, HAS A MEMBER OF THE ABA SITTING AS A CHAIR MEMBER OF THE COLLEGE working on getting them ABA approved by integrating a really high speed technology program that meets the criteria for the ABA. As a matter of fact, they are and have posted huge write ups and articles about making Concord Law School the FIRST law school to EVER get an ABA accredation. Now, eveyone who is in law knows that the ABA is SLOW at getting there. For example, it took an ABA accredited "regular brick and mortar law school called Thomas Jefferson School of law 40 years to get approved and they had JUDGES that graduated from there. They literally had to go after the ABA for being Biased as well as prejudiced and they won their case :) I know that you might not have seen this because of how much energy you spend running your mouth, but if you did as much research as you do bull #$%ting about what you don't know, you would have actually not posted the out dated mis information you have splattered in here.
Not only are you outdated, you look stupid. You should hang it up before you get burried in here by people who are actually here watching this progress. I am not a Concord student or graduate, I came from a regular ABA brick and mortar law school, however, Concord has instructors from Harvard, Princeton, Berkley and other IVY LEAGUE schools who are also helping to work on this ABA issue. Believe it or not, they are coming up to speed very very fast.

For California being one of the hardest BARs in the Nation to take, people who pass this BAR can do LAPS around you.
PAYING FOR A NAME OF A COLLEGE DOES NOT MAKE YOU A GOOD LAWYER... HOW YOU WORK YOUR ASS OFF DOES,,,your posts reflect the kind of either student you are or attorney you are and I am sure it is less than good.

You...should think before you speak because now you look really stupid.

Defender One January 28, 2009 at 9:32 p.m.

Look people, I am a practicing attorney here in California. i was bored during lunch today and stumbled on this chat.

First, as an "employed" attorney who came from a traditional law school, and a lowered tier one at that, I and others regularly snuff out opposing counsels who come from much "better" schools. It is not the "school" that makes the attorney. Instead, I've notice it's more based on other skills developed from you life experience.

Second, I would agree with "Carolina Law" (but only on one subject) in that it will be an uphill battle for on-line law students to obtain paid employment as attorneys, especially in California. Employers have many, many prospects to choose from. Consequently, the "non-traditional" on-line student will be disadvantaged. But, they can still find work. I know of one that just obtained a NG verdict against an attorney from an ABA school. Again, success as an attorney depends on many variables.

Third, many attorneys prefer to start their own practice. Working at a large law firm requires 'billed hours" that can translate into long hours. Tell you the truth, working at a large law firm is not worth it. The current starting salary at a large firm is $150K. But guesss what, for the most part, they are working 70 plus hours a week. Do the math . . . unless you really enjoy stress, it's not worth it.

Overall, school matters to find paid employement as an attorney. But it really has no bearing on one's ability to practice. That is more from personal experience. Street savvy helps too.

P.S. - Carolina Law: you do sound very defensive and unprofessional. You might want to tone it down a little.

Defender112 February 13, 2009 at 12:43 a.m.

Carolina,

Who cares if you went to Duke...I am guessing thats the only good school in your state. Guess what, the only schools that matter in Tier one are the top 3...the rest are all the same as tier 2. Seriously, get a life Carolina. Secondly, the New York Bar is NOT harder than California. Did you do any research before you participated in this discussion?? I would LOVE to face off against you in court...you suck. Third, these so called "Ambulance Chasers" that you mentioned are most likely making more in one year than you will during your entire career working for a large firm who could care less about you. Personal Injury lawyers are needed in society whether you like it or not. Who do you think defends clients against the very large companies YOU favor? Carolina...you are a joke. You are just mad that someone can graduate from a correspondence program and pass the bar while saving 100k in tuition as well as have the same title as you. You are such a bitter little bitch. Ciao

Defender One February 17, 2009 at 9:23 p.m.

Ok I thought I'd come back to this post to make another comment.

Carolina Law, I just have to say that I am a current deputy public defender in California and DAMN PROUD OF IT!!!. I never really liked your tone previously, but now I am angry.

You keep cutting down PD's . . . remember you were one. If we are such lowely attorneys, why is it we get calls from private atorneys asking us what to do and how to do it? We regularly turn away applicants from top flight schools. Why? No, it's not because they will leave. Instead, the office knows being a good trial attorney entails much more than simply your educational background. Again, street smarts, aggression, when to fight and when to submit, all play an important role. Any idiot can figure out what the appropriate defense is. But how to present it effectively is another story.

Additionally, I don't know what you were getting paid, but I'm well into the six figure range and don't work more than 45 hours a week tops unless there is a jury trial coming. Sure, the potential to make more $$ is greater in private practice, but I didn't become an attorney just to make money. So if you are making "ten times" the amount I guess you can retire pretty soon.

Perhaps you would get further with your comments if you just stopped belittling people and sounding so condescending. It will carry into your work.

Defender One February 19, 2009 at 1:21 a.m.

I viewed that pay scale and it is an "average." Example, last year counties in the south were paying slightly over mid $30K. yes, that's low. But do yourself a favor and get up to date. I live in California and practice in a county near OC and LA. Won't say specifically which one. Counties in this area pay $55K to near $70K starting salary. Although large firms are cranking out $160K starting now, let's face it most won't getting those jobs.

Most counties here increase pay per year at about $11K per year for first 5 to 6 years. That's not including regular cost of living pay raises and union negotiated raises. The pay is quite good and generally PD's and DA's here make more than most private, crim def practioners as a whole when taking into consideration paid holidays, benefits and a "pension." of course, there are some private guys commanding six figure from one murder trial. And oh, the last work performance evaluation I received indicated I alone handled over 1000 cases myself. Mutiply that by the nearly 150 attorneys we have here thoughout the county, our volume is substantially higher than what you noted in your earlier response. Work evaluations are conducted every 6 months.

You say you are not cutting down PD's. That's good. But your responses sound pretty condescending. Like I said in the first e-mail, you might want to tone it down a bit. Not trying to cut you down. But the truth is your responses are obviously coming off badly with everyone on this chat. Everyone here is an attorney (most everyone). A little common courtesy please? Food for thought.

Perspective Student March 27, 2009 at 7:14 a.m.

I just stumbled on this site looking for critiques about Concord, and thanks to Carolina Law, I've finally found pay dirt!

A couple of things I wanted to mention about previous points made. The link Carolina Law posted in regards to the success rate of Concord graduates passing the California bar exam was broken (It looks like it was mistyped). In an attempt to fix it, I also attempted to try a newer date in the URL and found this dated July 2008:
www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions...

It shows a 44% success rate, so at least there is some improvement although it's still about half the average of all ABA schools.

With that said, I still question Carolina Law's conclusion that the school itself is at fault. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Concord's student population is made up of a majority of full-time working students. The school also has lower standards as far as which students are accepted (No LSAT requirements, etc). I wonder if the 44% rate we see above is a direct reflection of the students lack of time and/or abilities, and not so much the fault of the campus. There's only so much one can do with source material within the fixed time frame.

In researching other online schools, I've found some scathing student reviews for places like University of Phoenix, yet I cannot find anything similar for Concord Law School. If education was really sub-par, I'd expect to read all kinds of complaints.

Perspective Student March 31, 2009 at 6:13 p.m.

Assuming that Concord has not changed their delivery method, what else but the student population itself could be responsible for this?

Perhaps now that there is more demand to become a student at Concord, there is more of a chance to weed out the chaff. Demand for ABA schools must be much higher still, which could also explain the better end results one sees there.

Another Perspective Student April 2, 2009 at 10:02 p.m.

Online degree haters like Carolina Law will never have their minds changed. They got their degrees the old-fashioned way and can't grasp that the world is changing around them.

Perspective Student is right, Concord is improving. This same pattern happens with every new school. As the students graduate and go out into the work force, they show how well the school is teaching and others follow them. Soon employers decide that the school is one to hire graduates from and eventually better and betters professors decide to teach there. As better professors teach there and the school's reputation improves, better students attend. Eventually, the spiral upward to parity with other schools.

I think that if the ABA were to allow online education, we would see many brick & mortar schools turning to online teaching. Once they develop and online course, they can teach it many more times without having to have more classroom space. Cornell Law was one of the first to try out online legal education in a couple of test classes along with other law schools. It was a success and what helped the ABA to see their way clear to allowing for 12 credits of online education.

I can't wait for the day when the local brick & mortar law schools will be able to offer online degrees. Not all of us were able to go to law school right after our bachelor's degree. Some of us working stiffs had to go to work. Some people are able to attend part time night school at their local law school (if they offer it), but they are limited in the number of students they can teach at one time. Also, as someone said earlier, many people are working full time and it is inconvenient to attend a brick & mortar school. Until the local brick & mortar school can offer online degrees, Concord is the best shot choice for an online JD. They are affiliated with a regionally accredited university and they are nationally and regionally accredited. It is the ABA that is behind the times on accrediting them.

Speaking of the ABA being the accrediting body for Law Schools. Isn't that a conflict of interest? To be a CPA, one needs to pass exams and can go to any accredited university for a degree (including online degrees). Let the ABA be the keeper of the bar exams and let the regional accrediting bodies be the accrediting agency for the schools. Maybe then, there would be more schools, more competition, lower tuition rates, better flexibility in scheduling, and better service from the law schools.

NWCU student April 6, 2009 at midnight

Carolina Law - For context I'm a student at an Online school (Northwestern California Uni). I have no misconceptions about what I'm entering into and NWCU doesn't oversell itself and is upfront on the limits of an online degree. I work full-time and enjoy studying law and at <$3k a year it's a good way to test the waters. Not everyone has ambitions to graduate from a Tier 1 school and being a lawyer in a large NY firm, but those that do will no doubt go the path you've taken, and of course have to have strong academic ability.

Classes are not the only way to learn (after all how many people do you know that have gotten degrees while missing many/most classes!). However I also agree that most people do need interactive learning - recordings and text chats are limited in their effectiveness.

'Interaction' is important - Since last year I have been using video conferencing regularly to meet with my boss, staff and colleagues who are all 5000 miles away, and while it's not as good as face-to-face meetings it's a suitable replacement because of two main reasons: (a) talking to a "person" is possible, and (b) it's real-time nature. Take away either one of those components and you're back to lecture recordings and slow text chats.

Last year NWCU introduced video conferencing for those with an internet connection, a webcam and time. I just finished my Sunday two hour video conference with my NWCU "class" and get as much out of it as any "regular" class I've attended. They are definitely in the here-and-now!

But the question remains if classrooms are the only effective way to learn to be a lawyer. Other equally advanced countries accept correspondance law degrees but ensure acceptable lawyers are produced by putting them through a mandatory traineeship with a practicing lawyer (Australia has this program and I have heard England is similar). I'm not sure if one is 'better' than the other.

Most people don’t use video conferencing at work or home so its effectiveness is still widely unknown (and so were computers in my early school years too). These things take time and it's clear from my personal learning experience that the hurdle of real-time classrooms has been met. Of course quality of education and learning the lawyering skills necessary to prepare students is another issue that can succeed or fail online or in the classroom. Many (most?) lawyers probably never have to argue in front of a judge, and if that was a critical compontant of being a lawyer, then bar exams would have an oral testing component, which is how a language course is graded (oral skills tests).

....So perhaps it's now a question of meeting all the other non-interaction ABA standards which would apply to ALL schools i.e. everyone with an online school won't be accredited just as there are many traditional schools that also aren't ABA-accredited (at least in CA).

Perspective Student April 10, 2009 at 7 p.m.

Carolina Law,

You mentioned:
"What is weeding people out is the Baby Bar"

For Concord, yes it looks like this is the primary filter.

Back to my point about student abilities, according to this Concord document (Page 4):
www.concordlawschool.com/info/custom/con...

If a student has a 3.1+ GPA, they have an 86% chance of passing the FYLSE (read: baby bar) the first time. Since Concord has students at that level, this strengthens my argument that student ability, not campus teaching ability is the primary factor for success.

One has to remember that for ABA accredited campuses, there are a number of "weeding" factors too. Cost is higher, there are class time availability vs work hours conflicts, LSAT requirements, and good old fashion classroom availability constraints. Are there any statistics that show how many perspective students are simply denied entry and are never given a chance to begin with?

You previously stated:
"Student interaction with class discussion is vital to gain the skills needed to be a successful trial attorney."

When going through the "Video tour" of Concord, I saw an example of student interaction with class discussion. The only difference is that instead of the communication being oral, students discussed matters through writing.

I have to wonder if the asynchronous nature of online learning is actually more beneficial than with what can occur elsewhere when one considers that the duration for each class is fixed. While everyone can "speak" at once in an online environment, students have to take turns elsewhere. It seems that there's a much higher likelihood that students won't be able to participate using the synchronous turn-based method.

If one assumes that most cases never go to court, I'd think having written skills would be better off most of the time. One should also remember that there is more to law than trial too and that not all students have this as a goal.

Finally, one last statement. You went to a tier-1 school that, for the sake of argument, taught better argumentative skills. Yet you still had to do public defender work before being able to move up the chain to where you are today. Could it be that no law school teaches enough to be a real-world lawyer, and that regardless of the school (online or otherwise), there is additional critical knowledge that can only be gained through experience? In other words, do you give your school full credit for your abilities today, or were you really just a diamond in the rough who polished himself through hard work (in school or otherwise)?

Carolina Girl April 11, 2009 at 2 a.m.

Perspective Student, Concord accepts students with all kinds of GPA's not just 3.1.Also the classes that are required are just comprised of lectures with old videos.The live classes are much better, but those are not mandatory.You should think about it very hard,considering that Concord is part of Kaplan and that also brings another set of problems.Carolina law is also right that the Baby bar is weeding people out, but why spend 20,000 on a school for one year to fail the final test with this reputation.

Carolina Law April 12, 2009 at 9:32 a.m.

Carolina Girl, I know so much about it because I keep up with the developments of my profession.

Perspective Student, the 'weeding out' process isn't even applied by Concord which is why most students never pass the bar. Many never even bother to take the baby bar. You will find plenty of students who live out of California yet still go to Concord and have no chance to practice law. Why do they do it? They just want to say they have a JD I guess.

Your argument that Concord weeds them out on ability while ABA weeds them out on their wallet is hardly the case. There are plenty of ABA state schools that have affordable tuition. For these affordable programs they still have to pass an LSAT, still have to make passing grades in a challenging environment and they have to meet demanding time constraints. At Concord, you don't have to do any of that. The bar exam statistics prove that it is 2:1 more effective than Concord for their best year. Considering the overall Concord rates it is still 3:1 more effective and these are only Concord elites. Many never even bother to take it because they know they aren't ready.

Writting vs Oral skills all depends on how hard you want to work and how much money you want to make. If you want to be the guy/gal who spends all their billable hours pouring over documents and sitting by your phone for a call just to scrape together enough hours to pay your rent; then by all means be that attorney. If you want to bag easy hours and earn the right to be called a trial lawyer, then go to an ABA school and develop the oral skills you will need.

For your last statement, I started in the public defenders office because I wanted to gain trial experience to set me up for the move to the big leagues. I now gain more trial hours and I command a better percentage because I bring recognition to my firm. If you spend all your time doing low key work, when it comes time for your compensation committee review, you aren't going to command much. Gaining that trial experience was far better for me than joining a firm as a junior who would only be working my tail off to make money for senior associates.

I give credit to my school for properly preparing me for the life I lead as I have avoided many mistakes others have made who did not learn such lessons. It has made my career that much more enjoyable and prosporous. I am not saying Concord can't get you to being an attorney, I am saying you are going to toil much harder and will make more mistakes.

Perspective Student April 15, 2009 at 1:55 a.m.

Carolina Law,

Thanks for your feedback. I'm not certain why you lurk here, but I'm glad you do.

Perspective Student April 15, 2009 at 10:17 p.m.

I did some more research... FLYSX (AKA FLYSE) pass rate of Concord for their last test was 14.3%! (First timers was 19.8%)
calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions/FYX/FYX0810-Stats.pdf

Previous it was close to 40% so the numbers certainly jump around a lot.
calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/admissions/FYX/FYX0806-Stats.pdf

which probably explains why their website averages the statistics:
info.concordlawschool.edu/Pages/First_Year_Law_Students_Exam.aspx

Either way, those numbers are NOT promising especially when combined with the 44% pass rate of the real CA Bar. (As Carolina Law has been saying all along)

The sad thing is that /none/ of the schools required to put their students through this test have good passing rates which makes me think the whole thing is rigged by the ABA.

Also, there are non ABA approved schools that ARE California accredited. These schools do NOT have to take the FLYSE. Of course Concord is not one of these.

It's brick and mortar for me!

Carolina Law April 18, 2009 at 5:13 a.m.

I told you most fail the baby bar and never go on to take the bar. 80.2% fail to be exact. The second comers are even worse. That means out of all the Concord students that plan on becoming CA attorneys, only 8% go on to pass the bar. If in ABA lawschool had that high of a program failure rate, it would be shut down immediately. There isn't even a reason for it to be in operation except to swindle you out of 10Gs a year.

Carolina Law April 27, 2009 at 4:54 a.m.

Brickhouse, you must have alot of hands as many times as you use that phrase. The ABA is the association accepted by the states to regulate their education standards. It isn't the ABA you should be pointing the finger at. Blame the state bar associations. Many of them even have non-lawyers on them, so it isn't fair to say it is an only ABA club.

Distance Learning has been in existance in this country ever since the first Pony Express carried correspondance mail. There were certain limitations a DL degree could get you ever since it was first introduced. Now that the E-revolution has hit us, we are seeing just how far people are willing to accept DL earned degrees. The difference is, the traditional brickhouses as you like to put them, are now jumping on to the bandwagon giving a credence to the format. People are fully ready to support someone who holds a DL degree, but they especially care where it comes from.

The ABA are allowing law schools to offer classes online, but only the courses that are straight book learning. Most still believe that the classroom debates that rage in law schools across the country are still a vital part of the education. There are many states that I have previously stated that will substitute the degree for being apprenticed by a judge or big time attorney where these issues can still be discussed. Until the DL format allows the development of oral communication skills, you are still going to find a stiff resistance to their acceptance by the ABA. If state bar associations start dropping ABA as the standard, you will see a dramatic increase in schools like Concord.

Why do people go to Concord if they know they will not be able to practice? You say people want to do it their own way but then the question is, do what? The biggest thing I hear people who go the DL route say is they just want a JD to 'know the law' so they can protect themselves. That is an admirable goal but there are far cheaper ways to go about it. A JD without holding a license means little and can actually hurt you in a job hunt. People will think you are either overqualified, or are going to take off once you pass a bar. Tack on tens of thousands in debt and you are in the same position every JD holder who fails the bar is in. I have mentored a couple summer associates who have failed their bar exams, it is a painfull experience when people consider themselves failures with so much effort and so little to show. Going to Concord really lessens that pain as they haven't sacrificed as much and I would hope had lower expectations with what they were going to do with the degree.

Carolina Law May 7, 2009 at 10:10 a.m.

A simple class in logic or a couple classes in philosophy will NOT give you the skills necessary to become a good lawyer. The Case-Dialogue method gives the student the ability to break down a case and look at it from every aspect while faculty constantly challenge your way of thinking until you start to "think like a lawyer." Doing this for several years drills students to the point where it becomes second nature. The Socratic method is proven to work and the bar pass rates are evidence of it, especially the pass rates of Philosophy majors. It not only helps your oral skills but the very nature of how you approach a case. The method is vital for the progress of higher order thinking and this is not what you get from Concord.

E-discovery problems from Ivy Leaguers? My ESI software is pretty easy to use. It sure as hell beats flipping through thousands of pages of documents when I can just run it through a search engine. Keeping up with E-discovery regs is somewhat of a pain but that is why God made consultants. I am sure your AM Law 100 firm can afford that, you probably have your own department. Tell your Ivy Leaguers to use it... lol.

If distance learning will offer teleconferencing then it would certainly help the case of DL delievery and break down many of the barriers that are currently opposed to it. As I have said before, that is the major hinderence. As this would require the students to be available for class times it doesn't make for a very profitable venture.

Carolina Law May 8, 2009 at 9:56 a.m.

NWCU Student,

The problem with the DL degree is that it will lock you out of most jobs keeping you from gaining good experience. You can forget about being hired by any reputatable firm. If you try to join the PDEF office to gain experience your degree still matters as many areas are highly competitive. It is particulary true in California. If you start work in the boonies like I did you will still see traditional grads applying for every job.

When you come straight of law school, nothing is more important than where your degree is from and your grades. It is all relative to the level of school and your GPA as to how it is weighed in selection. Interships matter too which is something DL will probably not have. The cards are just so stacked against DL it begs the question if you feel it is worth it to spend the next ten years of your career proving yourself... if you even get a career at all.

No one is more elitist the lawyers... not even academia.

To Carolina Law May 14, 2009 at 12:50 a.m.

"No one is more elitist the lawyers... not even academia".

And in thus lies the greatest flaw in our legal profession.

Carolina Law May 28, 2009 at 8:14 a.m.

Why do you think firms hire you based on your school and grades? It is all they have to go on. Obviously, the further the time between you and lawschool that factor diminishes but you have to have a track record first. If you can pass the CalBar you can obviously make a case, having an in-house case review for candidates would be ridiculous considering that is only part of the job of junior associates. If you are applying for higher positions your work history will be more important. If you were a Jr. Associate at a major firm will be the first thing they look for or if a PD like me would look at the trial history. The better your school the better your initial opportunities which will follow your career for quite some time. I would never have been given so many big cases in the PD office if I didn't have school/grades to give them the confidence in me to handle it. The same principle applies in the commercial sector but even more so in law as you can't practice until you become licensed.

Carolina Law May 29, 2009 at 8:43 a.m.

Employers ALWAYS look at your school and grades even for higher echelon positions where you bring experience. Don't think that ever goes away. Obama is nominating Sotomayor not just for her ethnic background, but she was second in her class at Princeton and that is his main defense for the pick. She has been out of lawschool for decades and that still follows her around. It shows you the elitism of the profession, but I guarantee you it is about universal.

Highschool drop-outs getting over on experienced MBA grads at a F-500? yeah yeah, OK. rofls

I'm done with this conversation.

Leaning towards NWCU May 29, 2009 at 9:22 a.m.

It is admirable that many people are trying to find a way to advance. I'd like to think that many people have a passion for law and want to make a difference along with an increase in earnings. It's all relative to where someone is right now and where they'd like to be. Going to a DL school is an excellent decision for many people. You look down on those of us who live in California and are contemplating a non-accredited ABA school; what you don't realize is that we have an opportunity not afforded to citizens of the 49 other states. It would be stupid on our part not to consider this stroke of good luck that California, being the a progressive state, is allowing distance learning students to sit for the bar. Studying the trends of history, we all know it's just a matter of when this will become commonplace around the nation.

Most people on here are doing exactly what they should: taking the best available option and seeing what they can do with a higher education. You are obviously so rich and fulfilled with your education that it makes me wonder what you are doing here trying to defend your superiority against a bunch of people who are doing the best they can with the cards they're holding.

The Amazed May 30, 2009 at 8:58 a.m.

I just stumbled upon this board and am absolutely dumbfounded by the comments of CarolinaLaw. I am a licensed physician in CA that graduated from the (according to the AMA) top school in the country (no name dropping). I graduated with people I wouldn't trust to dress my dog's hang nail. I also know physicians that graduated from "no-name" institutions. Some of these docs are the most talented professionals in the medical field. To generalize, as you so in-eloquently have, that the proficiency of a graduate is directly commensurate to the type of institution in which they attended is absurd.

I don't pretend to understand its origin, but you, sir or ma'am, have a chip on your shoulder of immense proportion. Why you have taken up the cause of belittlement towards a non-traditional education or its graduates is beyond me, but it doesn't speak too highly of your ethics or maturity.

With you being a self-proclaimed attorney of measure, my suggestion to you would be to direct a portion of your "persistance to the cause" to a more worthwhile endeavor.

May you find a smidgeon of enlightenment from my input.

Legal Years Old June 2, 2009 at 6:32 p.m.

Even with the lower pass rate, I would be willing to listen to and hire a Concord graduate who passes the CA bar. One thing that many of us forget is that most if not all of these students are working full time while going to school, working full time while studying for and taking the FYLSE and the bar. Many have graduate degrees already under their belts in other professions, adding another facet to their knowledge. I dare wonder if a 20-something in a brick and mortar ABA law school on loans or daddy's dollars has the ability to prosper under that load.

The Bottom Line June 16, 2009 at 4:50 p.m.

Is Concord worth the time and effort if you are serious about becoming a lawyer? Would like to hear from former students...graduates or not? Or any information that would assist me in making up my mind.

Lawyer2B June 18, 2009 at 4:32 a.m.

First, I would like to say that I am a PROUD Concord Law Student. I simply love the program. I’m proud of my experience thus far and equally proud to be a pioneer and advocate for the distance educational experience.
Let me begin by providing some additional insight regarding my background: I am a mother of small children, a wife, a small business owner and an advocate within my community. I hold a Masters Degree and as a "Generation Xer" I wholeheartedly embrace both technology and change. Now I chose Concord because of its reputation, innovation, valued tuition price and complete distance learning opportunity. In all, such features afford me the ability to run my current practice, raise my children and serve within my community. Attending a local law school in my area is simply not an option due to my personal and professional obligations and the cost of tuition.
Initially, my main goal for attending law school was simply to gain additional knowledge and develop my skills for my growing practice. However, as my studies progressed, I soon acquired a yearning to utilize my law degree to advocate for those who are less fortunate.
Although at this moment (as I too believe that the ABA guidelines will soon change---much like society is changing as a whole at a rapid pace) the options on "where" a Concord law graduate can practice is limited. However, this soon too will pass. States throughout the country are now being petitioned /challenged by Concord graduates” for a right to practice. The funny thing is: these Concord graduates are winning their cases in these states and being permitted to practice.
Prior to 1878, before the ABA standards were implemented, attorneys where trained via self-taught studies or privately, much like a long-term apprenticeship by other practicing lawyers. This was the same method many of our country’s forefathers, such as Abraham Lincoln learned.
Overall, Concord has made significant gains in such a short period. Recently, Concord law graduates have successfully been sworn into high Supreme Court positions. Concord Law is definitely representing and presenting a hard case for the “ABA” and other antagonists to deny!

Lawyer2B June 18, 2009 at 4:35 a.m.

In all, Concord Law school is a pioneering academic institute that will, in due time, pave the way for new standards established by the "ABA." Yes, it currently has limitations, but many of us who desire a law degree and may not have any viable options, accept such challenges.
Folks, the desire to attend law school is often decided by those who sadly relate the legal profession with earning a salary of $100,000+ a year. What a poor decision and long-term commitment to make in attempts to generate such an income. Especially, when there are so many other routes one could employ to generate such an income for far less time and without the substantial student loan debt. There are so many students who attended law school for the wrong reasons and with a false sense of security and/or knowledge of what they believed the profession to be. This is so prevalent today; evidenced by the increase in books available on Amazon.com geared towards helping lawyers who are burned out or totally disappointed transition out of the profession into one that best fits their personality and personal likes.
Many of us who are already conditioned within our current family and/or profession understand that obtaining a legal education is not all about the money. It’s about the desire to elevate our knowledge, profession, business, and others within the community. Imagine one who could serve within a governmental or local role as an attorney, for much less pay in comparison to other “corporate law positions”—but with more fulfillment because there’s less to no debt and because we enjoy the role for all the right reasons we decided to attend law school.
No doubt, I believe that Concord plays a integral role in educating lawyers for the future. It’s certainly due time for others to acknowledge the success of the program as well.

Lynda July 19, 2009 at 11:16 p.m.

Cheers to Justice 1, NWCU and all of you who are open-minded about Concord. With 22 years as a paralegal (with local, state, and national certifications and honors), I have considered this school and will probably be doing this soon. Yes, I am older, so is that against me as well as DL? I fear Carolina Law would say so. But I can get even older with a J. D. - or without one. Yes, I will be learning online because I do not live anywhere near a law school and have to work to support myself and my family. I have a husband who is ill and a mother in assisted living, both of whom need my time and care. Yes, I will have to pass the California Bar and I wish to work as an attorney. But I don't plan to practice in some "elite" firm, thank you. I've had quite enough of that. I plan to help the common person, and animals - those who cannot speak for themselves and make a difference with whatever time I have left on this earth. I don't need to make $100,000 per year; I've been down that road and the rewards aren't worth it. As several prominent California lawyers teaching at a recent convention in San Diego told me, there is nothing wrong with Concord, and your success depends on the goals you have in mind. Is it worth it to you personally to have a J.D.? My answer is yes. My great-great grandfather, James S. McCartney, was attorney general of Illinois during the 1880s. He had worked and studied under President Lincoln and was an officer during the Civil War. My grandfather was a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., a graduate of the University of Texas. His son, my uncle, followed in his footsteps and is now retired. He graduated "summa cum laude" from Johns Hopkins. When I told him of my plan to attend Concord, he said several of his friends had ended their careers trying to take the California Bar, meaning those from Johns Hopkins or other equally prestigious schools. Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. Quite frankly, however, I think I have a good head start. Carolina Law, I think your comments are rude and discouraging to those who have no other option, and you remind me of some very arrogant, short-sighted people I have had the misfortune of working for in the past - but never again. I'll let you know when I pass the Baby Bar. 8-)

The Bottom Line August 7, 2009 at 4:31 p.m.

Sometime ago I had a similar problem Patricia, and I asked to be changed to a new admission counselor. Not sure if it is the school or simply a few or a couple of employees not doing their job. With some hiccups it was resolved.

NWCU Student August 9, 2009 at 10:49 p.m.

Hi Tay,
I did a fair amount of research into these DL law schools earlier in the year. I already have a career and I'm a business-person at heart, so I don't ever see myself as a lawyer. The legal area has so many opportunities for the business-wise e.g. foreclosures/sheriff auctions of property. Lawyers have an almost monopolistic understanding of these complex yet business-lucrative processes. These are my reasons for wanting more knowledge in this opaque area. Also I'm finding the analytical thought process law is teaching me is worth my time.

Anyway, so I wanted to only "dip" my toe into the law student waters, so I looked at four factors when evaluating DL law schools:
(1) Cost = tuition
(2) Outcomes = pass rates in the baby bar and bar exams
(3) Reputation = number of students, industry reputation, time in operation.
(4) Admissions = who do they accept

Concord no doubt sells itself better on their website than all other DL law schools. Not one to give into hype, I took all emotion out of my decision - it came down to a toss-up between NWCU/Concord/OBCL. All three had comparable outcomes so they are all doing something right (tie). Concord releases more grads each year, but NWCU had been around a lot longer (tie). All DL's are not ABA-approved, so all probably opened up the same doors in CA, and non where nationally approved by state bar associations (tie). OBCL had consistently high outcomes for DL's, but had a very strict code-of-conduct so I wasn't even eligible to enroll. Finally NWCU won on the cost factor (NWCU+). There are a couple of other DL law schools left to investigate too, but remember I was initially only dipping my toe in; although now my objectives have changed a little....

So here I am in NWCU now and loving it. The favorite part of my study program are the real-time webcam classes - twice weekly I spend 1-2 hours in a video class with a dozen students led by a NWCU professor. This is as close to a real class-room as one could desire, and perhaps other DL law schools have these too but I hadn't seen any that did back in Jan.

Ultimately everyone's reasons are personal, but there's mine. I hope it helps you with your decision. Sign-up and you'll be in the course within a couple of weeks, and then you'll know pretty quickly if it's for you or not. Finally there's the refund policy if you find it's not what you're looking for. Think long and hard about it - it's a four year adventure!
GOOD LUCK TAY. Let me know if you have any other questions.

NWCU Student August 10, 2009 at 8:16 p.m.

Like yourself I had a specific interest in only a couple of subject areas. Turns out I'm enjoying it all more than I thought; not what I was expecting at all.

If you have 'little interest in the law for the most part', and your only purpose is to understand straight-forward legal aspects of your business, then you might want to consider doing a short business/legal course at a local college or reading a small-business focused business law book which usually covers those very stright-forward things you mentioned. You'll still need a lawyer for anything beyond the straight-forward, but then again I'm not sure Law School will give you everything you're looking for either. For example: I'm presuming an IP lawyer is probably still going to a divorce lawyer when they want a sterling job done.

Without law school you'll have several thousand hours remaining to study your love (art/archeology)!!! "Dipping your toe in" is inexpensive so perhaps it's still worth a go. If you do choose to go, then it probably matters less which DL school you choose compared with the bigger decision of whether to go, or pursue other interests. They all use similar books, teaching the similar material and similar cases to ultimately sit the same bar exam. If you're unsure then you're probably in the same boat as thousands of other law students over the years! Heck, try both and finish the one you like best; it isn't a life-long decision like marriage! Good luck with your decision Tay, let us know what you decide.

Decided August 11, 2009 at 6:17 a.m.

I quickly left that environment for DL so I could be viewed as equal to every other student. The DL format does not allow anyone to judge me beyond my academic performance and I have no pressure to verbally communicate with anyone. I personally have not viewed myself as disabled however I understand in general that is how I am viewed. Please let me point out I have never had a GPA lower than 3.8, I enjoy learning and study I am in my final term at Kaplan due to complete my degree in Paralegal studies On Sept. 8th, 2009. I will be returning to Kaplan and following through at Concord. I agree whole heartedly it is not the name of the school that makes the student but the knowledge the student possesses to build a career.

Tay August 11, 2009 at 3:40 p.m.

Well, with hopes I will never need a divorce attorney. But if I do I would go to an attorney that knows divorce law. For the other stuff, contracts and the sort, it would be nice to have a degree that allows me to serve as my own legal council should I need to. I did all the research for my first set of contracts (no lawyers involved), so I know I can do it without law school. However knowing I could successfully serve my business as an attorney would be good for my business. Plus my family makes a good point in that most wish I would return to school and complete my studies. I guess you could say they gave me something to think about.

On the other hand of that, I could do so much more with the money I'd use for tuition. It's a decision that I'll have to ultimately make for myself. I don't reckon it will be a quick decision, I am still very much undecided. The only thing I know is that it will be school online for me, as I do not have the ability to quit on my responsibilities in life to attend campus in a day program. There are no colleges near me either, so commute would be an issue as well. I have things to deal with over the next few weeks, but with hopes I will know with one hundred percent conviction what I will do after that time.

Thanks again for your input on the school. Again, best wishes in your studies.

Joel August 23, 2009 at 10:20 p.m.

I am a future attorney and I have a question because I see all these comments on Concord and I was wondering what will it have to benefit in the future because don't get me wrong I'm just like the next person that wants the best for his family and future.
Does Concord open the door to a good future meaning a availability to jobs being a lawyer?
Would all states accept the Degree if I got it from Concord? If so what states would that be?
And another question if I did graduate from Concord would I be able to become a attorney anywhere in the US?
"Please comment"
Thanks

EJD Prospect August 24, 2009 at 6:16 p.m.

Joel,

Like you, I had a lot of questions about Concord's credibility as a Law School. However, after taking an honest inventory of my personal time and financial constraints, I realized that my concerns were moot. My personal circumstances would not allow me to attend a traditional law school PERIOD! After that simple exercise, it became VERY clear that I could only attend law school online.

The next step, following that revelation, was finding an online law school that seemed to be more progressive/aggressive in becoming ABA Accredited; and I was compelled by the results of MY research that Concord was leading the way in that effort. Although there were no guarantees that Concord would be accredited in my life time, I was willing to take the risk considering the alternative(A. Get an online Law Degree or B. Get no law degree at all)

In my case, the personal choice to attend Concord was based on facts; not personal opinions from people on a board/blog. When I say facts, I mean that I took an objective approach to solving my problems/concerns. I recommend that you do that same, by asking/answering tough personal questions objectively. Ask yourself some of the following questions:

1. Do you want a law degree to practice law, use the degree in a non bar environment, or just for the sake of saying I have a law degree?

2. Are you in a position to afford and attend a brick/mortar school that will provide you with the Law Degree you want?

3.Will attending that brick/mortar school allow you to be worry free as to whether the degree will be respected in the field of Law or not?

4. Is attending a traditional law school even an option based on your time constraints or other responsibilities?

5. What's your personal risk tolerance for attending a Law School that doesn't produce the level of respect that you expect as a professional in the field?

These are just a few examples...

I'm proposing an objective method because people's opinions matter as it relates to THEIR personal experiences. That's it. Their opinions (mine too) should not be used to predict what future opportunities exist for Concord graduates or any other Law School graduates for that matter. If you want the respect of a Harvard LS Graduate, then you should go to Harvard. I think it would be delusional to go to Concord LS and expect to receive the same respect as a Harvard LS Grad. I'm not saying that Concord isn't of equal quality; I'm simply acknowledging that the perception of Concord's quality is not at Harvard's level at YET.

That being said, I'm sure there are Harvard LS grads NOT working in the law field. My point is, the school name (Harvard or Concord)will only get you so far in life; the rest will have to be earned through personal effort and knowledge. Just my opinion...
FYI... I start Concord 1st Sept. If you want to know how it goes, leave me an email. I will check back periodically for your response.

Good luck!

JS

Anjel October 19, 2009 at 2:19 p.m.

Any lawyer, in NY who spends this much time bashing Concord, has way too much time on their hands,or a lot of money. But then, time equals money.... You must not have a lot of the latter since you appear to have a lot of time :)
Sorry, this soon to be CA Lawyer and Concord Graduate calls it like she sees it :)
Times , they are a changing.....