Showing posts with label Legal Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Legal Education. Show all posts

19 August 2025

The Idea To Action Pipeline

My education and life training was typical of a lot of people who grew up in upper middle class families and lots of upwardly mobile people who used education and skill training and socialization in the course of securing those things. There are maybe a hundred million people in the United States, a country of about 340 million people, who have been raised or trained to have the kind of mindset that I have.

As younger children, a key focus from my parents (and the parents and teachers of most people like me) was on making good choices, and that's also something that was an important part of what my wife and I, and most of our peers viewed as good parenting.

As I got older, and advanced in my education and socialization all of the way into college, I was raised and taught (formally and informally) to identify problems, to analyze them in evidence and experience informed ways, to be familiar with lots of proven problem solving strategies, to devise appropriate solutions to problem that would work, and to know how to evaluate what is likely to work and test proposed solutions to see if they work as expected (and to revised the solutions if they don't).

Even in law school, the curriculum, while it taught us to nuts and bolts of what the law says, was very oriented towards identifying legal rules and official policies that were good, or were flawed, partially so we could use this knowledge in our adult lives and careers to push for better policies, and partially so that when we encountered flawed rules that we couldn't change we could understand what we were up against, why the rules were a problem, and with this information could devise the best strategies for dealing with them.

We learned to be on the lookout for good ideas that other people had, from other countries and places within our own country, from history, from different cultures, from people with a good track record for innovation, from sources that specialize in identifying good ideas. In the areas of science, and technology and medicine, back before the Internet, we subscribed to Popular Science and Science News. In the area of style and food and architecture when we moved to the West, there was Sunset magazine. These days, for example, I regularly check in on the Boing Boing websites, and read the latest academic scholarship from free sources like the arXiv and bioRxiv and SSRN preprint websites, NBER, the Legal Theory blog, and the various law professors blogs.

It is a way of thinking and conceptual tool kit shared with modest variation, by a large swath of people trained to make up our classes of mangers, professional, and makers. It's an approach used by scientists, engineers, inventors, transactional lawyers, mediators, business executives, entrepreneurs, policy makers, and innovators.

One of the textbooks used in my first college level political science classes, at Miami University of Ohio, was called "Power and Choice". And, the training, upbringing, and inclinations that I developed and that a huge swath of people developed, was focused on the choice side of this formula.

One of the reasons that I blog, and a major theme of my life, and the lives of lots and lots of people, although I probably have the luxury and means to do so more than most people, is to float constructive ideas for how we as a society can make better choices and find better solutions. Sometimes they are proposed government policies or laws. Sometimes they are better way to fund or finance something. Sometimes they are new technologies to could be used in a new way. 

Sometimes they are concrete approaches to concrete problems like better ways to landscape our home in a city in what is almost a high desert, or a better kind of appliance, or coming up with a better way to keep track of what pills I've taken or need to take, or a better way to keep track of what we need to buy at the store and what we already have in a way that we can actually find it, or how to manage household plants, or a more efficient way to pay bills.

Many of these ideas are solutions to problems that somebody else has. How to make better military procurement choices. What tools we could make available for first responders and disaster responses. How to tax publicly held companies and multinational business in a better way. How to deliver better health care results for our society as a whole, while doing so in a more affordable way. How to cut red tape in big bureaucracies.

Collectively, most of us have much less familiarity, less training, and less comfort and familiarity with the power side of the "power and choice" formula, even many of those of us who are truly exceptional and extraordinary at the choice part.

A lot of us are attracted to politics because we care about and have a good skill set for making policy, but are adrift when it comes to securing the power necessary to putting those policies in place. A lot of the scientists who see most clearly what paths to new scientific discoveries would be most fruitful and which are most likely to be dead ends are stymied at how to generate momentum and funding for those ideas in the scientific community. Lots of us are aware of businesses that would be good to invest in, or would be good to short, but don't have the financial wealth or the influence with people who have access to money to do anything about this knowledge. Lots of us are aware of innovative technological solutions that could bring about a lot of constructive change, but don't know where to begin to go about getting those solutions adopted more widely.

People like me, and there are perhaps a hundred million of us in the United States, have lots of good ideas, but feel hopeless or frustrated when it comes to turning these ideas into action.

And, it isn't just that we are stupid or missing the obvious. The idea to action pipeline is hard for most people to locate, is clogged up, and is full of seemingly unnecessary twists and turns that make it less effective. Acquiring the power to make even a seemingly obvious on brainer innovation that is itself minor seems to take absolutely epic amounts of time, money, connections, and effort that seems grossly disproportionate to the swift moment it takes to recognize that an idea is good and should be put into action.

It is no secret that I am no fan of Elon Musk, who is the richest man in the world. And, Mr. Musk is not a particular genius when it comes to coming up with ideas of his own. The technological innovations behind Telsa, SpaceX, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, the Hyper loop, and his other projects were all the work of someone else. His ability to identify good ideas is slightly above average, but it isn't particular exceptional. Frederick W. Smith, who founded FedEx, is cut from the same cloth. He had identified one particular, not really profoundly innovative idea that could be implemented with technology that wasn't cutting edge but was still pretty new at the time he came up with it.

But, I have to grudgingly acknowledge that what Musk and Smith both excelled at (and may even continue to excel at) is securing the resources and momentum necessary to turn moderately good, although fairly obvious ideas that no one had implemented (as is so often the case) into action that allowed the ideas that were mostly children of other people to actually come into wide use.

In the case of Musk, being an heir to an emerald mine fortune helped a lot. Smith also grew up as the son of a wealthy, moderately successful business owner, attended the top local private schools, and went to Yale in some of the last years when doing so was more about money and connections than academic merit.

But turning ideas into action can be a lot more challenging for the rest of us, partially because we don't have nearly as much training in how to do this as we do in how to come up with good ideas (i.e. because we are much better at making good choices than exercising power), and in part, because the idea to action pipeline at the moment is mediocre and has deteriorated over time is a society that is starting to stagnate (something that Economist Tyler Cohen wrote a book about).

This is true even for people like me who have a solid nuts and bolts understanding of things like how capital is raised for businesses in the modern U.S. economy, how the political process works, and the inner workings of academia, while spending decades working side by side by quite successful political figures and business people and academics (albeit not necessarily the peak "A-list" individuals in their respective fields).

Yes, it is possible to innovate and turn good ideas into action, even if, in my humble opinion it is too hard to do so. And, it is true that innovation shouldn't be too easy or free of gatekeepers. There are also a lot of really bad ideas out there that, when implemented, do immense harm. The more easily ideas get turned into action, the more important it is that the ideas that receive the thumbs up are good ones.

For examples in the 20th century of bad ideas being adopted too quickly and causing immense harm, ask the people of the early Soviet Union, Maoist China, revolutionary Cambodia, or North Korea. Ask the members of cults like the one organized by Jim Jones. 

Ask the people who thought it was a great idea to cover beautiful hardwood floors with cheap vinyl who convinced tens of millions of American homeowners to do so. Further back, ask the people who thought that putting the ill-drafted Second Amendment into the United States constitution was a good idea.

More recently, look at the policy initiative of RFK, Jr., or the actions taken by Elon Musk's DOGE, or the "Liberation Day" tariffs in the second Trump Administration.

On the other hand, lots of opposition to new ideas is mindlessly stubborn, ignorant, corrupt, or mendacious.

Sitting in my living room under the ceiling fan on a hot, dry summer day in August, after returning to work at home after a morning in my office doing a lot of work that actually generates money, I don't have a solution for how to improve the idea to action pipeline. But, surely, even identifying this as a crucial and pervasive problem in our society is progress in and of itself and can lay a foundation for future progress.

16 May 2025

Team Death

In the "they didn't teach us this in law school" department:

One of the things my job requires on a regular basis is talking with clients about death and grievous disabilities and injuries. This is something that makes most people uncomfortable and is very unfamiliar for people who aren't "Team Death" professionals (a group that includes estate planning and probate lawyers, funeral home directors, cemetery officials, clergy, grief counselors, hospice nurses, corners, bank trust department officers, life insurance sales people, financial planners, actuaries, Social Security bureaucrats, many florists, many kinds of doctors, and many CPAs).

It takes many years to find ways to do that which communicates to people what they need to hear and understand, without being too socially uncomfortable. Ordinary etiquette discourages discussing these possibilities at all. It can be depressing and many of us superstitiously just don't want to "tempt fate."

It is almost a whole philosophy and way of thinking, starting with recognizing that death will eventually happen to everyone, that most people experience serious disabilities and injuries at some point in their lives, and that life frequently presents people with surprising tragedies and unexpected triumphs of survival. Someone who seems fine and healthy today can die tomorrow, while someone who seemed to have only a few months to live can sometimes hold on for another decade or more.

24 July 2024

IQ, College, Engineering, Law, And National Merit Scholarships

College

Students who are below a 22 on the ACT composite, a 1073 on the new SAT composite, a 1610 on the older SAT composite, are not in the top 35% of his high school class (in a high school that is representative of the general population), or have below a B+ GPA, have a significantly impaired, low chance of graduating with a four year degree. 

This cutoff is not very sensitive to the selectivity or to the type of institution attended.

The threshold for any ordinary college program corresponds to an IQ of about 110 on a 15-point standard deviation scale or 111 on a 16-point standard deviation scale which is about the 75th percentile of the general population (a higher percentage because the general population includes high school dropouts who aren't included in SAT and ACT percentiles).

But a strong work ethic and grit can make it possible for you to graduate despite a lower IQ in many majors.  

Certain programs (e.g. some STEM programs such as math, physics and engineering), however, have a higher effective minimum threshold for a student to have a reasonable chance of graduating. Basically 0% of people who earn such a degree have an IQ of under 111 (and the threshold to have a better than 50-50 likelihood of graduating is an IQ of 119). Unlike some undergrad majors, engineering has a strong threshold effect.

Under 15-point standard deviation WAIS IQ scaling standard, an IQ of 100 is average for the population as a whole, an IQ of 105 is average for a high school graduate, and an IQ of 115 is average for a college graduate. So, an effective cutoff IQ of about 110 for a reasonable likelihood of graduating from college, fits with the concept that one must be discernibly better than average high school student to be likely to graduate from a college or university with a four year degree.

The Bar Exam

Maximal test prep can increase an LSAT score by about 3 point in the 120-180 range of the test. The maximum impact on other standardized tests scores is similar (but there is more room to improve in math than verbal on the SAT).

An IQ of 100 is roughly an LSAT score of 133, and almost no one who gets below 145 on the LSAT has any realistic chance of passing the bar exam. The bar exam is highly correlated with IQ test results. It takes an IQ of about 117 to pass the bar exam eventually after multiple tries, and the average IQ of a lawyer who passes the bar exam is about 133. (Medical school is much more selective.)

The patent bar is even harder to pass with a low IQ because to be a lawyer admitted to the bar and be a patent lawyer at the same time, you need an engineering BA (there are exceptions but similarly rigorous ones). 

National Merit Scholarships

About 2300 National Merit Scholarships were awarded in the year 2010. It turns out that just 10 elite universities accounted for well over half of these awardees. 

Number of NMS in entering class / size of entering class.

Caltech 42 / 200
Harvard 266 / 1600
Yale 234 / 1300
Princeton 196 / 1300
Stanford 110 / 1600
MIT 110 / 1000
Brown 91 / 1500
Duke 105 / 1600
Penn 125 / 2000
Berkeley 91 / 6000

Total 1270

27 May 2024

Big, Low Profile Issues

Today, some big, lurking low profile issues that deserve more attention:

* The public school system does a poor job of serving those who are not in the top quarter or so academically. Far too many students have a curriculum oriented towards preparing them for four years of a selective liberal arts college education that they will not pursue, which will not benefit them, and in which the routinely fail and struggle. Too many students are pushed into enrolling in AP classes which they aren't ready for and perform poorly in. Too many students are pushed into enrolling in college programs for which they are inadequately prepared and fail in at high rates. Regional vocational schools and good community college programs are among the most important exceptions to that rule but are under-enrolled.

* We have far too many people, especially men, without college educations who have skills and work habits that would have been valuable in the 1950s and 1960s, but are no longer needed in the quantities that are present in the work force. Our entrepreneurs have failed to find worthwhile ways to utilize what they have to offer. Public policy history is also filled with dozens of case studies of job training programs designed to address this problem that have failed. Our society needs a vision of a workable decent American dream for them, for people with minor criminal records, for people who had children at the wrong time, and so on.

* Our court system does a poor job handling medium sized civil lawsuits, those larger than small claims and small collection and residential eviction cases, but less than say, $100,000 in controversy. We need a better system for mid-sized litigation. There have been efforts to do this, but Colorado's simplified civil litigation rules under Colorado Rule of Civil Procedure 16.1 does a poor job of it.  It also needs to be a system that people without legal training and with poor bureaucracy navigating and writing and research skills can navigate without catastrophic results.

* We also need more affordable legal professionals to provide affordable representation in litigation where there isn't an ability to pay a lot, which a system that requires seven years of education plus a bar exam and some on the job training to be competent in doesn't provide. Specialist, independent licensed legal professionals in practice areas including child custody and child support, immigration law, criminal defense, consumer bankruptcy, and landlord-tenant law could fill this gap with mid-skill professionals.  These licensed legal professionals would have training levels similar to tax preparers, bookkeepers, police officers, real estate agents, customer service desk workers, title company closing officers, consumer loan bank officers, mortgage underwriters, and insurance adjusters.

* We need an eviction process that is connected to a homelessness mitigation response, because that is how a lot of homelessness starts, and an eviction process that does not result in undue collateral harm to the possessions of people who are evicted.

* We need to support foster children well after they turn age eighteen, until they can reach stable self-sufficiency, and need to improve the quality of life for them in the foster care system.

* Vast numbers of homeowners live in homes in that are in dysfunctional homeowner's associations. The way the needs that these HOAs serve are met must be reformed, because volunteer elected officers of small HOAs aren't competent to run them and democratic self-governance is not an ideal model for meeting most of these needs.

* We need our public systems for taxes, for welfare benefits, for health care, for routinely consumer legal problems, for business and labor regulation, for home ownership, and so on, to be less complex so that academically average and below average people can navigate them.

* We have a large unmet need for inpatient mental health and substance abuse care. The deinstitutionalization movement made some good points, but went too far and still hasn't recovered.

* There is not enough medical education capacity. We could be training twice as many doctors each year and still have extremely well qualified graduates.

* We need better models for how to handle the inevitable decline in population and tax bases of cities and towns in the Rust Belt and in rural America.

* Every place in American should have clean running water and functional sewage systems.

* Our jails and prisons are dangerous, do almost nothing to reform inmates in most cases, and are a major factor in the formation and strengthening of criminal gangs. They need to be run much differently.

12 March 2024

The Six Worst ABA Accredited Law Schools

The American Bar Association accredits law schools in basically every state but California, and requires a 75% two year bar exam passage rate to remain accredited. Six currently ABA accredited law schools didn't meet this standard in the latest round of data:

School NamePass %
Cooley Law School55.87%
District of Columbia57.14%
Pontifical Catholic University of P.R.63.33%
Inter American University of Puerto Rico65.84%
Western State College of Law68.42%
Southern University72.15%

05 February 2024

Jefferson County Courthouse Case Proceeds

I've previously noted that the Court of Appeals decision in this case, a premises liability case at the Jefferson County, Colorado courthouse (commonly known as the Taj Mahal) would be a great one for a law school textbook. Now, the Colorado Supreme Court has affirmed this ruling. The Colorado Supreme Court opinion (County of Jefferson v. Strickle, 2024 CO 7, ¶ 1) explains that:

Beverly Stickle lost her balance and fell when she stepped down from a walkway to the parking lot surface at a parking structure adjacent to the Jefferson County Courts and Administration Building. She broke her arm and subsequently sued Jefferson County (“the County”) for damages sustained from the accident. The County moved to dismiss, arguing that it was immune from suit under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (“CGIA”) because (1) the parking structure is not a “building” and (2) the condition that Stickle alleges caused her injury was solely the consequence of the parking lot’s “design.” If either of these arguments were successful, the County would indeed be immune from suit. However, we conclude that the parking structure at issue is a building as that word is used in the CGIA and that the dangerous condition that Stickle alleges caused her fall is not attributable solely to the design of the parking structure. Accordingly, the County is not immune from suit, and Stickle’s claim may proceed. 

07 December 2023

California Legal Education And Bar Exam Statistics

 

California is the only U.S. states that has non-ABA accredited law schools, and the results have been mixed at best. 

Law schools not accredited by the ABA account for 31% of law school enrollment in California, but only 4.3% of lawyers passing the bar exam in California in the most recent year in that state.

California Bar exam passers by type of school:

ABA Accredited: 95.7%
CA accredited: 4.1%
Unaccredited: 0.2%

22 November 2022

Losers Of 2022, So Far

These are some of the losers of 2022, so far:

* Twitter
* Elon Musk
* Cryptocurrencies (see, e.g., Bitcoin and FTX)
* Blockchain
* Tech workers

* Kanye West

* Vladimir Putin
* The Russian Federation
* The Russian military
* Military conscripts
* Black Sea warships
* Tanks
* Belarus

* Abortion rights
* SCOTUS legitimacy
* Indian Tribe sovereignty in Oklahoma
* Gun violence victims

* Bad cops (who are now being held accountable at unprecedented levels)

* Colorado Republicans
* Election deniers and their lawyers
* January 6 rioters
* Rudy Guiliani
* Dr. Oz
* Steve Bannon (conservative political figure)
* Alex Jones and InfoWars (conservative pundit)
* Republican Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters
* Former State Supreme Court Justice Ray Moore
* Brietbart
* Kyle Rittenhouse (acquitted vigilante killer)

* COVID vaccine deniers

* Decent Republicans that respect the rule of law and elections
* Political moderates
* Democrats in Wyoming
* Librarians in Oklahoma

* Commercial real estate
* Spirit Airlines
* Diners
* Car buyers
* Home buyers
* U.S. Postal Service on time delivery
* Denver's Intracity A and R rail lines

* Cell phone caller spoofing
* Extended warranty advertising

* Macroeconomic models of the U.S. economy
* The idea that compatibility matters to success in romance
* The Î›CDM Standard Model of Cosmology
* The Xenon1T dark matter signal

* Native American sports team mascots
* Pejorative place names
* Confederate place names

* Frozen Dead Guy Days in Nederland, Colorado

* Tory politicians in England

* Rural high school football
* Rural five day school weeks

* Attorney Michael Avenatti (who stole money from client Stormy Daniels)

* Haiti
* Venezuela
* Afghanistan

* Western Michigan University's Thomas M. Cooley Law School (granted three year extension to cure worst in the nation bar passage rates outside Puerto Rico)

* Climate change deniers
* Lake Mead, Lake Powell, and the Colorado River
* Traditional grass lawns in the West
* Incandescent light bulbs
* Texas electricity utility customers
* Greeley, Colorado

* Church membership

21 September 2022

When Is Higher Education Not Worth It? A Dialog

The Discussion 

This is an excerpt from a Facebook discussion of when higher education is not worth it. Some of this discussion is excerpted from my prior posts at this blog without citation, and the discussion is lightly edited and supplemented with links and bracketed additional support. 

My post:
Most often when you don't have the high school grades, college admission test scores, and the math and English proficiency from high school, sufficiently strong to give you a very high chance of graduating (or full benefits from the experience even if you do scrape out a degree). 
Roughly speaking when you look at the data, college isn't worth it for students who are below the 65th percentile on ACT or SAT composite scores (about 22 for the ACT and 1120 on the SAT), who are not in the top 35% of his high school class (in a high school that is representative of the general population) or have below a B+ high school GPA in schools that are not representative of the general population, or who need remedial math or English.
[[F]ewer than 38 percent of high school students who plan to get a college degree actually do so within 10 years of graduating. Of those with poor high school grades, less than 14 percent achieve their college plans. . . . 92 percent of students with low grades planning to earn an A.A. failed to do so—even higher than the 86 percent of those who abandoned their plans to earn a BA. . . . 45 per cent of dropout in the first two years of college can be attributed to poor academic performance in college classes. . . . One of the better sets of data with marginal graduation probabilities involves a comparison of likelihood of graduating from Northern Iowa Area Community College between students with some college level work exposures in high school and those without this exposure. It compared the performance of students at the lowest quartile (with an average high school GPA of 2.29, the middle quartile with an average high school GPA of 2.74 and the highest quartile with an average high school GPA of 3.21). For those without exposure to college level work, graduation rates were as follows, while those exposed (about a fifth of the sample) had the rates in parenthesis: Lowest Quartile: Male 4.18% (6.57%); Female 17.17% (25.04%); Middle Quartile: Male 19.04% (27.49%); Female 44.51% (56.38%); Highest Quartile: Male 41.25% (53.08%); Female 68.58% (77.86%). . . [S]tudents placed into remediation had lower ACT scores and high school GPAs. For example, students placed in math remediation scored a mean of 17.4 on the math section of the ACT while students who did not take the classes scored 23.3 (a similar gap, 15.8 versus 22.8, is found for English remediation). A simple comparison of the outcomes of students placed into remediation and those who are not suggests that remedial students had worse educational outcomes. After five years, a larger proportion of them dropped out of college without a degree (65.2 for those in math remediation versus 30.8 percent) and fewer of them completed a baccalaureate degree (18.1 for those in math remediation versus 53.3 percent). About sixteen percent of each group received a two year degree rather than the planned four year degree. . . . At least 3%-5% of students will fail to graduate in six years no matter how well academically prepared and screened they are, for reasons that are generally completely unrelated to any lack of academic ability or study skills or interpersonal skills, such as a serious illness or injury, death, family financial woes, elder care demands, deciding to have children, or pursuing a promising non-academic opportunity (e.g. founding a company with some partners). But, the remainder of the non-graduation rate seems to be strongly correlated with academic ability.]
Also, college/university might not be worth it if you have a viable career path in your chosen field (e.g. military service, Olympic sports, baseball, music, art, computer programming, non-financial marketing/sales, running a small business, or a skilled trade) where a college degree is not formally required.

Further education and training after high school do make sense for everyone. But, a two or four year academic degree isn't what benefits everyone, or even most high school graduates.
Response:
Those are solid guidelines. If there were a way to get that into the testing system so kids know. You can imagine those families/students of people who do not reach that promise themselves..."I'm going to work harder in college mom and dad" but when the freedoms of being out in the semi-real world of college and in many cases away from home it doesn't add up. My son's first college room mate lasted 7 weeks before he had to go home. The Constant Party and Drinking were too much.

But again, I appreciate the data. I wonder if they could make a Prep School, held at Community College that students would have an extra year of getting there studies on board and then enter a 2-4 year program would work. Enabling them to sink or swim better.
My next comments:
My intuition is that kids who aren't at that point academically when they are seniors in high school wouldn't benefit much from more classroom instruction, which wasn't very fruitful for the last twelve years, right away. 
Like J.D. Vance (odious politics of late notwithstanding), something like two to four years of military service (or some other structured with a very non-academic classroom format experience, for example, learning a trade or working construction or the Peace Corps or semi-pro art or music, or ski instruction/river guide type work) first would probably be more helpful. Some people just need more time to mature too.

When I was in junior high and high school (I grew up in a college town as a child of a professor and a college administrator) and again in college itself, the old timers on the faculty would talk about how much more thoughtful and focused the GI Bill students were than traditional seventeen or eighteen year old college freshmen. 
[GI Bill students had served in the military in the post-World War II era before going to college and their veteran's benefits paid for it. They were older and had more life experience for that reason. They were also often even older than the twenty to twenty-two year old veterans who enlisted straight out of high school, because many GI Bill students were drafted, or enlisted voluntarily, when they were already a few years out of high school. Most GI Bill veterans were men and men, in particular, often mature later than women, which is one factor in the higher education gap between men and women.]

Even lots of academically high achieving kids were are academically ready can burn out after too many years of non-stop classroom academic education (something that is really common in Japan and Korea and Europe where high school is more intense, that is mediated in places like Korea and Israel and Switzerland with mandatory military service).

Sliding one to four one semester long college class length remedial math or English classes in during that time period, stretched out over two to four years with only one class at a time at a slower pace than in regular school instruction, while doing something else primarily, might work though. Frustration with remedial classes in community college is one important reason that community colleges have the highest dropout rates of all, even after a single year.

Math is the #1 remedial subject that holds kids back from benefitting from college and can be fruitful to remedy because the body of knowledge that kids with remedial needs who are otherwise ready for college need is quite small and can all fit in one or two textbooks that you can learn step by step at a modest pace.  
[Algebra is one of the biggest hurdles to getting a high school or college degree — particularly for students of color and first-generation undergrads. It is also the single most failed course in community colleges across the country. . . . At American community colleges, 60 percent of those enrolled are required to take at least one math course. Most — nearly 80 percent — never complete that requirement. In Colorado, of those starting two year college: 52.7% needed remedial help in math, reading or writing. 40% needed remedial help in math. 17% needed remedial help in math, reading and writing. 12.7% need remedial help only in reading or writing. Of those starting four year college: 19% needed help in math, reading, or writing. 16% needed help in math. 3% needed help in reading or writing and very few need help in all three areas. Students who need remedial work in mathematics are much, much less likely to graduate than those who do not, in part, because of the remediation requirement which slows down the process of getting into real college work and is simply insurmountable for some students, and in part, because it is a litmus test for poor preparation for college and low academic ability in general. But, it certainly isn't entirely about IQ. For example, in the early 2000s, among students identified as "gifted and talented" (i.e. in the 98th percentile of better on standardized tests) by the Denver Public Schools, some high schools sent almost all to college without needing remediation, while others had less than 19% of its gifted and talented students achieve this feat.]
If you are in some sort of environment like electrical work or carpentry or operating an artillery battery that makes math more relevant to you, the motivation needed to cross the remedial math hurdle can surge. This new positive attitude towards math was common place in kids that transferred from traditional format schools to a regional vocational high school in the district I attended growing up, especially for boys from rural farm areas who were being taught by teachers who lived in the college town that shared the district creating a cultural clash and lack of buy-in.

Remediating English is much harder but not impossible if you start as young as possible. It involves several distinct issues that have to be addressed. Sometimes the issue is English as a second language instruction. Sometimes the issue learning an academic standard dialect of English when you grew up speaking a less prestigious dialect of English like AAVE (African-American Vernacular English) or Appalachian dialects of English. Sometimes the issue is just weak vocabulary and grammar and writing style, rather than learning a new language or a new dialect of English. 

Getting away from classroom instruction and seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, and having a more focused pre-professionally oriented program in the wings tentatively afterwards rather than a vague too free for people not mature enough to benefit from the freedom general four year degree program afterwards, can also re-motivate people.

But there will always be lots of people, probably 25%-50% of high school graduates, more men, fewer women, for whom any further academic instruction ever is simply fruitless for the student and a recipe for frustration and self-confidence destroying failure. 
We should recognize that and not let the best be the enemy of the good by trying to not rule out being a lawyer, doctor, or President of the U.S. for kids, when it has long before been clear that those goals, or even a college degree, is an unreasonable and even absurd expectation for a particular student. We need to have life scripts in our economy and society that work for them too.
Another fun fact: 
I mention the ACT composite above, but ACT English + ACT Math are actually more predictive of college success and retention than the ACT Composite or the other two parts of the ACT that are more content based. In relative terms, here is how predictive each subsection of the ACT is:

Math (significant at p=0.01 level) 26
English (significant at p=0.01 level) 16
Reading (significant at p=0.05 level) 3
Science (not statistically significant) -1.

The May 2013 study tested for differences in predictive power among the four sub-scores of the ACT using Ohio Board of Regents data on all students that matriculated to a four-year public college in Ohio in 1999.
Response:
Again, backing up your intuition with Solid Numbers. I appreciate your insight into this. Its Obviously something you have researched a lot and have thought a lot about.

Other Considerations

This discussion doesn't cover all of the relevant issues. There is also a whole body of data on several other key factors involved in determining if higher education is worth it.

(1) Particular majors and educational programs have greater or lesser returns. 

STEM programs and other quantitatively oriented fields, like economics and finance, tend to have higher economic returns for students. But these programs also require more demanding minimum academic preparation thresholds to succeed; "in most majors (e.g., History, English, Biology, social sciences, ...) students with modest SAT scores can still obtain high GPAs, presumably through hard work. However, we found almost no cases of SAT-M scorers below about 90th percentile who obtained high upper division GPAs in physics or pure mathematics[.]" So, despite high economic returns make these programs a poor choice for academically marginal students.

Other programs vary in the returns that they provide. 

Culinary programs have very poor economic returns despite being pre-professional. 

Sometimes it is hard to separate out factors like the fact that students in many P-12 education majors (especially the less academic ones) tending to be less academically able from the poor economic returns to these majors generally due to lower pay levels in P-12 education.

Graduate and professional school programs also have greatly varying returns. Economic returns in graduate J.D. and medical programs are particularly strong. Many MBA programs provide poor returns, and more generally, many kinds of master's degree programs don't produce great economic returns relative to PhD and professional degree programs. Other kinds of graduate programs vary considerably in the returns that they provide.

Medical school has such rigorous admissions due to an unreasonable shortage of medical school admissions slots (about 50% lower relative to the U.S. population than two generations ago), that almost every admitted graduates, becomes a doctor, and is successful in doing so from an academic ability perspective.

Law schools, however, admit many people who have dim chances of both graduating from law school and then passing a bar exam. If you aren't academically in the top half of college graduates, you are unlikely to graduate and then pass the bar exam. And, even then you are a marginal law student. Students who more reliably become lawyers and who thrive in law tend to be academically in the higher end of the top half of college graduates. This said, there are large economic returns to passing the bar exam even if your academic ability to do so is marginal, if your "W" factors, cultural capital, marketing ability, and business aptitude are strong. Academically marginal lawyers in the right kind of practice with the right other factors can do very well compared to their prospects in another other career.

(2) Particular institutions and kinds of institutions have greater or lesser returns. "For profit" educational institutions aren't worth it with only a handful of exceptions like flight schools. Only 26 percent of students who enrolled in private, for-profit institutions in 2013 managed to graduate within six years. Other schools’ six-year graduation rates weren’t great, either: 62 percent for public institutions and 68 percent for private nonprofits. 

In one study, student characteristics in that study explained 25% of the variance in dropout rates, while institution type explained just under 10% of the variance.

Some colleges are particularly effective at providing good returns for first generation college students and lower income students, such as the City University of New York system and the California State University system.

(3) Factors other than IQ, which test scores and to a lesser extent high school GPA and curriculum rigor discussed below measure, matter as well in academic success. Many of these factors are collectively called the "W" factor by one researcher for "work ethic" that are better reflected in GPAs than test scores and reflect conscientiousness, lack of ADHD, grit, and so on. 

But there are also other non-W factors that matter, such as cultural capital or a lack thereof that puts many first generation college students at a disadvantage. Closing related is the observation that students are more likely to benefit from higher education, if they have fewer "ACEs" (adverse childhood experiences) which can cause students to develop coping strategies that aren't very functional in a college or university environment.

Knowing how to overcome a learning disability or other disability if you have one is another factor.

Someone with strong W factors, lots of cultural capital, and a lack of disabilities or good practices for managing disabilities may benefit from higher education, even if their academic ability reflected in their test scores, grades, and the rigor of their coursework is marginal. This is, in part, because a college degree provides a lot of signaling benefits in the economic marketplace even when the experience itself doesn't intrinsically add much value.  

These additional factors can only make up for so much of a short falling in academic ability, however. Certainly, it isn't enough to make up for being in the bottom quarter of academic ability for typical women, or the bottom third of academic ability for typical men.

(4) Post-secondary education provides economic returns mostly in urban areas with healthy economies while providing much weaker economic returns in rural areas and places with stagnant economies.

(5) Marginal students who are admitted to a college and earn a degree have much better economic prospects than marginal students who can't quite manage to do that, despite similar levels of academic ability, due to signaling effects in the economic marketplace associated with having a college degree, even if they don't actually learn much in college and aren't very well socialized into the socio-economic class of college graduates. 

To some extent this effect is one of the symptoms of the degree inflation that our economy has experienced where many jobs expect college degrees that don't actually provide knowledge necessary to do the job and really just sort for IQ, W factors, and social class socialization.

(6) Less academically prepared students also learn less in college.

[A study] of more than 2,300 undergraduates . . . [from a representative sample of 24 colleges and universities described in] the book, "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses." . . . found an average-scoring student in fall 2005 scored 7 percentage points higher in the spring of 2007 on the [College Learning] assessment [which measures critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing]. In other words, those who entered college in the 50th percentile would rise to the equivalent of the 57th after their sophomore years. . . . After four years, 36 percent of students did not demonstrate significant improvement, compared with 45 percent after two [years]. Students who studied alone, read and wrote more, attended more selective schools and majored in traditional arts and sciences majors posted greater learning gains. . . . Students who spent more time studying with peers showed diminishing growth, and students who spent more time in the Greek system had decreased rates of learning . . . [A]ctivities such as working off campus, participating in campus clubs and volunteering did not affect learning. Students from families with different levels of parental education enter college with different learning levels but learn at about the same rates while attending college. . . . Black students improve their assessment scores at lower levels than whites.

Factors That Matter For Life Success But Less So For Academic Success

There are also other factors that are demonstrated to help life economic success, like extraversion, and connections with affluent or upper class individuals, that are only modestly relevant to academic success. 

Lots Of People Who Would Benefit Still Don't Get Higher Education Because They Can't Afford It Or Think They Can't Afford It

Also lots of people for whom higher education is worth it in the U.S., don't get that education due to low family incomes and a lack of appreciation of how lower income families can get higher educations with high sticker prices at much lower costs and with little to modest debt if the financial aid game is played right. 

21 July 2022

An Ordinary Appellate Court Ruling In Colorado

This post is not about an epic rule of law. It concerns the pedestrian and hardly "sexy" question of whether a county government can have liability when someone is injured by falling in a county parking structure allegedly caused by its failure to warn pedestrians of a hard to see step. This was decided by the Colorado Court of Appeals today.

Law professors love using these kinds of humble cases for teaching purposes to teach law to students (both in law school and in undergraduate legal courses like business law). This is the kind of case that would be perfect as a very first case in an undergraduate course about law like one that I took, called "practical law" when I was an undergraduate student.

I mention it for several reasons.

First, the decision is a rare, but increasingly common one, in which the opinion is illustrated with photographs embedded in the opinion itself. This makes this opinion less stale than dusty old English or early American cases that are common place in law school textbooks, making it feel more relevant and real and modern.

Second, the opinion also has the modern system of case numbers and paragraph numbers instituted to free litigants of the copyright protections that might apply (although case law later held that it did not) to commercial pagination of court opinions. Familiarity with this system is important in legal writing and research. 

Third, the decision is notable because the trial court judge ruled against the government (in a decision affirmed on appeal) on the legal status of the government that built, operates and maintain the courthouse from which the trial judge was ruling works, in regard to a parking lot that is literally right outside the front door of the courthouse. This illustrates Colorado's wisdom in having state court trial judges who preside in county courthouses appointed by the governor with secure tenure, allowing them to be independent in the lawsuits against local governments that frequently arise in these courts, rather than being appointed by local officials or as an ordinary partisan or non-partisan elected office, as many other states do. It provides a starting point to talk about state constitutional law, and the practical aspects of the separation of powers and judicial independence with a concrete example.

Fourth, it illustrates the basic rule of law regarding when premises liability exists, as well as a notable partial exception to that rule in some cases where the government owns real property. So, one can teach the private property and public property rules for liability in slip and fall cases in a single case.

Fifth, the decision, like most appeals regarding a claim of governmental immunity of some kind, is an interlocutory appeal, resolving the issue of governmental immunity before the case is litigated or tried. This is permitted in order to preserve the benefits of being immune and thus able to avoid litigation entirely, and not just not a rule that leads to a lack of liability on the merits. The general rule is that civil cases can only be appealed once a final judgment is entered in the case. So, it is a nice way to teach this fine point of civil procedure.

Sixth, it holds as a matter of first impression not decided by any previous Colorado appellate court, that the waiver of governmental immunity for dangerous conditions in public buildings extends to parking garages, and can apply to design and warning issues as well as failures to maintain the garage property (e.g. failure to remove snow and ice, or to repair cracked concrete). In a classroom setting, the "black letter law rule" that the case announces is often the least important point, because the law changes over time and can differ from one state to another, but it illustrates how new black letter law rules are created by the caselaw system of precedents in the U.S. legal system. The twenty-four pages the opinion takes to reach its really quite narrow and straight forward conclusion also illustrates the kind of reasoning and that depth of analysis that is typical in civil litigation.

For what it is worth, I believe that the case was rightly decided and the result is what I would have expected in this situation before seeing the opinion, as a lawyer whose first job in Colorado was with a firm that had a contract with CIRSA (the county insurance pool) to defend county governments from tort lawsuits.

06 December 2021

How Many New Lawyers Join "Biglaw"

Big law firms have increased their market share of entry level lawyer hiring since I was a new law school graduate in 1994.

From here.

12 November 2021

Women Scarce Among Most Cited Legal Scholars

I'm not surprised that women are very underrepresented among the most cited legal scholars, but I am surprised that it is so extreme.
Retired federal appellate judge and law professor Richard Posner is the most cited U.S. legal scholar on record, followed by Harvard University law professor Cass Sunstein, and the late New York University law professor Ronald Dworkin.

That’s according to Yale Law librarian Fred Shapiro, who analyzed the law review article and book citations of thousands of legal academics and jurists for a new list of the 50 most-cited legal scholars of all time, which appears in the latest edition of the University of Chicago Law Review.

Shapiro’s list, which includes citations through 2020, includes many familiar names, including Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe at No. 4; former U.S. Supreme Court Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr and Antonin Scalia at Nos. 6 and 39, respectively; and former Yale law dean and federal appellate judge Guido Calabresi at No. 25.

But it’s also generating discussion among legal academics about who’s all but missing from the list: women. University of Michigan law professor Catharine MacKinnon is No. 40. Stanford law professor Deborah Rhode, who died earlier this year, is the only other women to make the cut, at No. 45.
From here.

05 August 2021

Equity In Education

What steps can be take to address inequity by race, class, and gender in higher education, that would be better than stripping the college curriculum of general education requirements to make college degrees possible to earn in less time at a lower cost (thereby advancing equity, which the person to whom I was responding to was primarily considering in light of its impact on black college students)?

This isn't by any means a complete list, but here are a few thoughts on the subject.

1. College affordability which needs to change if we are to have anything approaching a meritocracy - providing grant based financial aid to the full extent of financial need to every academically qualified college student is the easiest and least expensive single step one could take to improve socioeconomic equity in the U.S. 

College attendance and completion is far more closely related to family income, even after controlling for academic performance, than it should be in the U.S.

2. Law school and med school ought to be an undergraduate programs as it is almost everywhere else in the world, turning a 7 year law school program and 8 year med school program into a 4 year law school and 5 year med school program. 

This is both an issue for affordability, and an issue of making it easier for women who are on a "biological clock" if they want to have children at a reasonable age, to pursue these professions.

3. While there are countries that have three year bachelor's degrees (and both my daughter and I graduated from college in three years in the U.S.), but that is made possible by essentially fitting the first year of the U.S. college curriculum into H.S. 

From a racial equity perspective in the U.S., I think a system that required that kind of H.S. program to go to college would exclude more black Americans from higher education than the status quo because the H.S. quality divide in the U.S. is greater than the higher education divide, so that would be a net minus and an extra year to figure out what you want to be when you grow up is also worthwhile. 

More plainly, lots of black Americans are stuck in shitty high schools - general education in college remedies a lot of the shitty H.S. education those students got, without penalizing kids (black and not black) who got good H.S. educations. 

Higher ed is easier to fix than K-12 for reasons that are hard to change in the short to medium run. K-12 education funding, curriculums and operations are controlled by state and local elected officials in a very direct, hands on way, and while school choice options exist, in lots of places there aren't any choices or aren't any good choices. The wide choices available in higher education, and the limited amount of political interference in how higher education operates, helps address institutions that are seriously deficient at that level better than the political tools at the K-12 level do.

The U.S. has among the best higher educational institutions in the world, and best typical higher educational experiences in the world, in terms of teaching quality, and its K-12 educational standards are not nearly so impressive.

4. Degree inflation and requiring degrees for positions that don't actually need them is a serious problem. Lots of jobs that only need four years of education require a graduate degree, lots of jobs that a two year degree is sufficient for require a bachelor's degree, lots of jobs that high school is sufficient for expect some college. But, the next point gets at an important source of this problem.

5. Four year college programs, that general education requirements contribute to, are appropriate because a lot of what one gets out of college (even more so for black students, on  average, than for middle class white students) is assimilation into an emerging multi-ethnic national social class of college educated people. Lots of inflated degree requirements are imposed because that is what employers are really looking for, and two years isn't enough to do that well.

Education Matters, Especially During An Economic Shock

In the economic shock of the pandemic, education mattered more for economic well being than ever, and lawyers did particularly well (according to sources in addition to chart below).

 



02 April 2018

Good Law Schools

One way to rank law schools is with revealed preferences based upon the undergraduate grades and LSAT scores of matriculating students. 

On that basis how do law schools rank?

A new law review article tells us:

LSAT & GPA Rank

Law School
U.S. News 
Rank
1
Yale
1
2
Harvard
3
3
Stanford
2
4
Chicago
4
5
NYU
6
6
Pennsylvania
7
7
Virginia
9
8
Columbia
5
9
Michigan
8
10
UC-Berkeley
9
11
Northwestern
11
12
Cornell
13
13
Duke
11
14
UCLA
16
15
Georgetown
14
16
USC
19
17
Vanderbilt
17
18
BYU
41
19
Texas
15
20
Washington U.
18
21
Alabama
27
22
Emory
22
23
Boston University
22
24
Minnesota
20
25
Notre Dame
24
26
William & Mary
37
27
G. Washington
24
28
Arizona State
27
29
U. Washington
32
30
Indiana
32
31
Ohio State
32
32
Georgia
32
33
Boston College
27
34
George Mason
41
35
Florida
41
36
Fordham
37
37
UC-Irvine
21
38
UC-Davis
37
39
SMU
50
40
Northeastern
74
41
Wake Forest
32
42
Colorado
46
43
Iowa
27
44
Arizona
41
45
Nebraska
80
46
Florida State
47
47
Illinois
37
48
Wisconsin
27
49
Utah
54
50
North Carolina
45
51
52
Houston
56
53
Villanova
56
54
Cincinnati
65
55
Washington & Lee
26
56
Loyola-L.A.
65
57
Oklahoma
63
58
St. John's
83
59
Temple
47
60
Baylor
50
61
Richmond
50
62
Cardozo
56
63
UNLV
59
64
Tennessee
65
65
Penn State
74
66
Case Western
65
67
San Diego
95
68
Maryland
49
69
Florida Int'l
101
70
Georgia State
65
71
Tulane
54
72
Connecticut
50
73
Kansas
74
74
Michigan State
88
75
UC-Hastings
58