I’m intrigued by these stories this week about North Carolina Central School of Law being the best buy for law school.

The law school combines low in-state tuition, focus on clinical skills (they have 14 clinical programs), high first-time bar passage rates, and low debt loads for graduates. The school admits to being a “no frills” law school, unconcerned with rankings and prestige but obsessed with value and quality.

Could this be a “model” for other schools to follow? Smaller, localized schools that eschew rankings manipulation and bells and whistles in favor of quality and clinical acumen?

My initial impression was that perhaps this is the beginning of a trend, a move away from rankings-obsession. But as I think about it, NC Central doesn’t seem all that different from many schools.

While there may be too many law schools out there overall, many law schools actually and exclusively serve a regional demographic that prepare students to be good lawyers. This doesn’t always (often?) lead to a good USNWR ranking. If anything, the attention they divert to upping their US News ranking only distracts them from doing what NC Central is trying to do – focus on clinical skills, reduce debt load, and graduate competent lawyers who pass the bar in one try and are better prepared than peers who paid 6 times as much for school.

NC Central isn’t a new model so much as a school that provides permission, in a sense, to ignore the rankings if you believe in what you’re doing and you’re graduating good lawyers. Of course, this is all notwithstanding the prestige and alumni network factors. But I think if you’re graduating quality people those things take care of themselves.

What it does for the prospective law student is challenge the notion that you should go to the most highly ranked school you get into. I don’t think it’s a fatal challenge, but if you live (and intend to stay) in the Raleigh/Durham, NC area and your choice is between Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, and NC Central perhaps NC Central isn’t as bad a choice as the US News rankings would suggest, particularly if it means the difference between $80K in debt and $20K (or less) with even somewhat similar job prospects in the region. (UNC, incidentally, is #22 on the best value list.)

I guess it depends what you want and what you value…. and, definitely, depends on the job market and anticipating future market trends.

 

3 Responses to Smaller, Local, Insurgent Law Schools = The Future?

  1. TDot says:

    The low cost is definitely the reason I’m there — comparable education to UNC, at half the cost over three years. Plus I can legitimately call myself a “Legal Eagle” ;)

    The only real downside I’ve found so far is that NCCU is dedicated to the strict C-curve, when our neighbors UNC and Duke (and I believe Wake Forest) all use B-curves. So we end up with lower GPAs without the name brand of a T1/T2.

    But considering how much NCCU Law has improved over the past decade since I first came to North Carolina in 1998, I’m optimistic about the school’s future

  2. Casebook Sherpa says:

    The curve issue is interesting, TDot. It’s similar to ours vs. other schools in DC (B- vs B), all of which are ranked “higher” than Catholic by USNWR. More and more, I’m convinced that cost should be a preeminent consideration for the prospective law student. Hopefully NCCU’s story (lower cost does not necessarily mean lower quality) and the effect of the downturn will help others see that as well.