E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
The ABA Task Force on the Future of Legal Education has tentatively endorsed the reduction of regulation of law schools, which might lead to the rise of more for-profit institutions in the field. I hope that, as the Task Force continues its work, it will consult empirical studies and Congressional investigations of for-profit education. Stefan Collini helpfully collects some eye-popping findings in the October London Review of Books:
At the end of July 2012 the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labour and Pensions presented an 800-page report, the culmination of a two-year investigation into ‘for-profit’ higher education institutions. The senators found that at such institutions a mere 17.4% of annual revenue was spent on teaching, while nearly 20% was distributed as profit (the proportion spent on marketing and recruitment was even higher).
Between 2003 and 2010, the vice chair of the University of Phoenix collected $574.3 million. The Phoenix vision may well be the future of the human services sector, in fields ranging from health to education. But let's not kid ourselves about its being predicated on improving efficiency, quality, or access. It may have certain advantages on each metric, and may well be the only option left for students shut out of a defunded public sector. But one has to wonder whether the jackpot paydays of those at the top are directly related to the low graduation rates, "instructional shortcuts, unqualified professors and recruiting abuses" alleged by Phoenix's critics. Posted
7:05 PM
by Frank Pasquale [link]