Pistol Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 VP for the university as a whole. not specific to the law school. this year, we did not have the largest class in school history, but did improve the overall gpa, SAT/ACT scores. The average gpa/test scores have been improving every year for many years now. We are getting to the point now where we try to "shape" our class as opposed to just "filling" our class, and that is exactly what the new VP is trying to accomplish. That's great news. I was getting tired of just watching the enrollment number grow. Made my degree feel cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 But the fact that it very well might not remain in the law school should be enough for many alums not to donate. -i can see chicken and egg here, law school rankings dropping/don't like FrB so i am not giving, but alumni giving is part of the equation on rankings (and i have no idea to what extent) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 -i can see chicken and egg here, law school rankings dropping/don't like FrB so i am not giving, but alumni giving is part of the equation on rankings (and i have no idea to what extent) Alumni giving counts for 5% of a university's score in U.S. News' undergraduate rankings. I'd guess the law school rankings are probably similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 SLU Law grew dramatically in enrollment for years and finally appears to have hit a plateau. This trend wasn't unique to SLU, as law schools everywhere got greedy by lowering standards, stuffing as many students as possible in there, and not necessarily devoting the necessary level of resources to sustain that growth. Then the law grads have to hit the streets with mountains of debt on their backs, and are finding that the jobs simply aren't out there right now. Supply and demand are grossly out of whack in that field and SLU Law wasn't above chasing the bubble and helping it burst. It's a shame Biondi looked at it as a cash cow while SLU Law grads are paying the price. -jan decides she wants to go to law school, applies to SLU, gets accepted, pays tuition, goes to school, racks up mountains of debt, is this SLU's fault? -1000 people apply to go to SLU law, 800 get selected, they pay tuition, go to school, rack up mountain ranges of debt, is this SLU's fault? -and the students weren't chasing a bubble also? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 -jan decides she wants to go to law school, applies to SLU, gets accepted, pays tuition, goes to school, racks up mountains of debt, is this SLU's fault? -1000 people apply to go to SLU law, 800 get selected, they pay tuition, go to school, rack up mountain ranges of debt, is this SLU's fault? -and the students weren't chasing a bubble also? At least partly, yes, it is the law school's fault. The law school recruits, and largely on the basis of postgraduate placement. It accepted larger and larger classes, ensuring more tuition revenue. Students graduate, pay on time themselves or with a loan, thereby upholding their end of the deal. Then they get out and most of them are not getting jobs anytime soon. SLU Law (or whatever law school) then looks like an empty promise. Yes, it is a student's choice to go, but there's no denying that law schools have not delivered. Only in the past couple years has this been exposed. Very suddenly, applications are way down and law schools are scrambling to figure out whether they want to admit more students they'd otherwise reject (scary thought, given how loose admission standards became at so many of them), raise tuition, or figure out to survive with less tuition coming in- or some combination of the above. I'm not saying the students shouldn't accept the consequences of their choices. But I don't have a hard time identifying with a 22-year-old terrified because he or she can't find a job, putting it off for three years to go to law school and gambling (the right word, given how much debt is often involved) that the job market will be better after graduation, especially with an advanced degree. I do, however, have a very hard time identifying with law schools that recruited heavily, used job placement statistics to sell prospective students on their school, built up admissions numbers, gladly accepted their tuition checks, and shoved them out the door, assuming the market would hold and their statistics would never drop. So I guess that's the long answer to your scenario. I feel bad for the students who saw this as their best option and it didn't pan out; law school is very, very hard work. I don't feel as bad for the schools who sold them a bill of goods because they got comfortable being the top cash cows on campus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 When I was a senior at SLU in 06, there were 3 law students for every 1 practicing attorney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 At least partly, yes, it is the law school's fault. The law school recruits, and largely on the basis of postgraduate placement. It accepted larger and larger classes, ensuring more tuition revenue. Students graduate, pay on time themselves or with a loan, thereby upholding their end of the deal. Then they get out and most of them are not getting jobs anytime soon. SLU Law (or whatever law school) then looks like an empty promise. Yes, it is a student's choice to go, but there's no denying that law schools have not delivered. Only in the past couple years has this been exposed. Very suddenly, applications are way down and law schools are scrambling to figure out whether they want to admit more students they'd otherwise reject (scary thought, given how loose admission standards became at so many of them), raise tuition, or figure out to survive with less tuition coming in- or some combination of the above. I'm not saying the students shouldn't accept the consequences of their choices. But I don't have a hard time identifying with a 22-year-old terrified because he or she can't find a job, putting it off for three years to go to law school and gambling (the right word, given how much debt is often involved) that the job market will be better after graduation, especially with an advanced degree. I do, however, have a very hard time identifying with law schools that recruited heavily, used job placement statistics to sell prospective students on their school, built up admissions numbers, gladly accepted their tuition checks, and shoved them out the door, assuming the market would hold and their statistics would never drop. So I guess that's the long answer to your scenario. I feel bad for the students who saw this as their best option and it didn't pan out; law school is very, very hard work. I don't feel as bad for the schools who sold them a bill of goods because they got comfortable being the top cash cows on campus. -same burden of fault for SLU with the person that graduated #1, the person that graduated as the median and the person that graduated last? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I took the statement by Nark to be more about his opinion of Keefe's chosen profession as a personal injury lawyer, rather than an assessment of the man's actual character. This is precisely what I meant. Prestigious law schools educate and train lawyers who are diverse in a wide-range of legal fields that don't involve trial work, including corporate transactions, international law, intellectual property law, etc. Plaintiffs trial lawyers don't really care about law school rankings and prestige because they spend their time building "classes" for mass tort litigation or chasing down personal injuries. In these circumstances, no one cares about how well-regarded your law school is or was. 15 or 20 years ago, SLU was a lot more prestigious and was concerned about producing a full range of attorneys, not just litigators. The article explains that "while Keefe will only be in the job for a year, he said he hopes to push the school and its leaders to think more about educating good lawyers and less about annual law school rankings." (Translation: I didn't do that well in law school, but have made a ton of cash as a trial attorney, so rankings don't really matter.) You can draw your own conclusions, but as a corporate attorney who attended SLU Law a decade and a half ago, I find the approach disconcerting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 we are lucky a man of tom keefe's credentials, loyalty, and passion has stepped forward for saint louis university, and the law school. Or perhaps we should be concerned that a man with ZERO qualifications to serve as the head of a major academic institution is doing so in order to serve as Biondi's fundraiser and bulldog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikendave Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 i know the family. shoot me. they are worth defending. second, tom keefe has been a substantial saint louis university alum/booster for years. third, even if the attempt (poorly worded in my opinion, but on second read, i can see that) was to condemn his chosen legal field, there is a place for plaintiff attorney's in the world. i dont think success as a plaintiff's atty = extortionist necessarily. we are lucky a man of tom keefe's credentials, loyalty, and passion has stepped forward for saint louis university, and the law school. As someone who is familiar with him professionally, I have substantial reservations about him. I'd rather not say more than that publicly as I practice in St. Clair and Madison. I can only guess what the med school/SLU hospital would think of this choice as he does a large percentage of plaintiff's medical malpractice cases suing doctors, hospitals and nurses. according to one website, his email is isuedocs77@(domain omitted on purpose). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 http://www.leadinglawyers.com/atty_profile.cfm?TOCUID=1051325 Don't worry bros, his community involvement is "extensive" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastBilliken Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 nm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 What are Keefe's credentials for running a law school? i was only commenting (prior to this post) on what i felt was an uncalled for and uneducated derogatory comment about an excellent saint louis university alumnus. i have no opinion on his ability to be the dean of the law school other than the fact that the extremely successful president of the university felt he was qualified. many times in an interim situation at a business, running a sports team/program, the duties are somewhat split up. maybe reliance on some of the administration tasks are delegated to existing personnel while decisions and other high level tasks (fund raising, marketing) might be the main tasks of the interim leader. i have seen interim people end up becoming the full time, i have seen the existing staff rise to the occasion and eventually be given the permanent position by performing admirably for the interim and the other higher ups. almost like a 1 year tryout or interview. who knows. but i do know that no one on our message board has the insight needed to make that decision any better than father biondi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willie Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I am not sure your last statement is correct. There are a few lawyers on this board who probably have a much better insight into the law profession then Father Biondi. I know of at least 1poster who was the managing partner of one of St. Louis's largest law firms. The new dean may have great character but I don't see how he is qualified besides being a Biondi guy who has Endowed a couple of scholarships. Biondi was desperate so he turned to a supporter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 i have seen interim people end up becoming the full time, i have seen the existing staff rise to the occasion and eventually be given the permanent position by performing admirably for the interim and the other higher ups. almost like a 1 year tryout or interview. who knows. but i do know that no one on our message board has the insight needed to make that decision any better than father biondi. Roy, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there is not a top tier law school in the country--or one that aspires to be one--that would issue a press release highlighting their new dean's extensive trial work and donations to the school rather than his or her scholarly publications, years of judicial service, and/or extensive experience as a tenured professor and legal administrator. Even worse, I cannot imagine any such school emphasizing how they intend to disregard academic rankings, which--right or wrong--are the universally accepted method for prospective and current students, alumni, and legal colleagues to measure a school's value and success. For over a century, SLU Law was held in very high regard. What Biondi has done to that reputation is a travesty, and it has devalued every alumni's hard-earned degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I find something curious on SLU's website: We apparently have no Chairman of the Board of Trustees. One might think that after Mr. Pruellage passed away, the board would held a meeting to elect a new chair (or that the vice chair would automatically assume the acting chair position). Yet Mr. Pruellage is still listed as chair. Also, Mr. Pruellage, one of St. Louis' top lawyers, left $1.1 million for the new downtown law school. Does it seem just a tad unusual that (apparently) the chairman of the board also didn't consult the dean of the law school regarding what's probably the single most momentous event in the past few decades of one of the U.'s most visible aspects? The vice chair is Tom Brouster, who also has a campus building named after him. Those were some pretty severe charges in the Dean's resignation letter. As I said earlier, the Board's action, or lack thereof, in the next couple of weeks will reflect both on them and on our university's so-called "Jesuit mission." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonwich Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Roy, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there is not a top tier law school in the country--or one that aspires to be one--that would issue a press release highlighting their new dean's extensive trial work and donations to the school rather than his or her scholarly publications, years of judicial service, and/or extensive experience as a tenured professor and legal administrator. Even worse, I cannot imagine any such school emphasizing how they intend to disregard academic rankings, which--right or wrong--are the universally accepted method for prospective and current students, alumni, and legal colleagues to measure a school's value and success. For over a century, SLU Law was held in very high regard. What Biondi has done to that reputation is a travesty, and it has devalued every alumni's hard-earned degree. Hey, Madison County has long been listed among the country's "judicial hellholes." Perhaps Father Biondi is simply doing double-duty and attempting to save Keefe's mortal soul at the same time he gets a figurehead dean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Bill Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Bonwich - my guess is the board was not even consulted by biondi before the decision was made about the building. He doesn't include anyone on these things. Who will become chairman of the board is a great question and I have my suspicions. Let's just say that I think money can buy you virtually anything if father biondi has anything to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Roy, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there is not a top tier law school in the country--or one that aspires to be one--that would issue a press release highlighting their new dean's extensive trial work and donations to the school rather than his or her scholarly publications, years of judicial service, and/or extensive experience as a tenured professor and legal administrator. Even worse, I cannot imagine any such school emphasizing how they intend to disregard academic rankings, which--right or wrong--are the universally accepted method for prospective and current students, alumni, and legal colleagues to measure a school's value and success. For over a century, SLU Law was held in very high regard. What Biondi has done to that reputation is a travesty, and it has devalued every alumni's hard-earned degree. dont spin my point. i take issue with you connecting tom keefe to the word extortionist. period. take that back. apologize for that and i go away on this thread. tom keefe doesnt deserve that. and regardless of whether he is actually qualified for the job or not, he is one hell of an alumnus and booster that we should be grateful extends his help to saint louis university. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldie Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Tom is a very capable attorney. He is also a pleasant person outside the courthouse. He has been generous to charitable causes located on both sides of the river. However, I don't think he is the person to fill the interim dean position. If I was a betting man I would wager that Dean Childress is spinning in his grave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Bill Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Spare me the crap b Roy. Nark owes no apology to u. U regularly rip our coach, mis morals, his person, etc. But if anyone dare say anything about one of your Belleville buddies, u throw a fit. Sort of a double standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouisvilleBilliken Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Look, I don't know the man so I will not comment on his character. However, any person would admit is would be impossible to run a law practice and a law school at the same time. Biondi is going let him do this. http://www.madisonrecord.com/news/245975-keefe-named-interim-dean-at-slu-plans-to-continue-his-practice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 dont spin my point. i take issue with you connecting tom keefe to the word extortionist. period. take that back. apologize for that and i go away on this thread. tom keefe doesnt deserve that. and regardless of whether he is actually qualified for the job or not, he is one hell of an alumnus and booster that we should be grateful extends his help to saint louis university. Roy, I could care less if your Belleville pal gave a lung to save Mother Teresa, he still has no business being dean of the law school. As an alumnus of Saint Louis University, you should be disappointed with the appointment as well. That law school has wonderful academics, many of whom have ivy league educations and are routinely cited in scholarly publications. They have professors who have served on the Missouri Supreme Court and Federal appellate courts. Now all of these professors will work for an attorney with no academic credentials, but who has made a lot of money suing doctors and has donated some of that money to the school. He also believes rankings don't matter. It is a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUTGR Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I apologize if this was already linked, but a little more on the situation: http://www.madisonre...ue-his-practice Some further reaction from some in the legal blogosphere: http://leiterlawscho...sis-at-slu.html http://abovethelaw.c...s-interim-dean/ I must say, Keefe sounds like an interesting guy, but hiring a personal injury lawyer to be a part time dean, even on an interim basis, strikes me as a very odd decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Look, I don't know the man so I will not comment on his character. However, any person would admit is would be impossible to run a law practice and a law school at the same time. Biondi is going let him do this. http://www.madisonre...ue-his-practice And it isn't like Keefe runs a huge firm, either. It is him, his son and another attorney. That's it. He pretty much is the practice. It isn't as if he is able to rely on a team of attorneys to handle his caseload for him while he is acting dean of the law school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.