Wednesday, April 18, 2007

move the law school downtown?

Hey, what did you think about the dean's idea to move the law school downtown? I saw a letter from the dean on the printer. I assume it was sent out in an e-mail but who knows. I also saw it in the Herald (last item). It sounds like it's a long, long term project so it's not like it would affect me or anyone who is a current student. Apparently the reason is that the new city comprehensive plan might end up killing the law school's planned expansion. Or something like that.

But it's interesting to think about what law school would be like if it was downtown. Downtown would be close to the courthouse so students would be more likely to do internships or clinicals. Otherwise I can't think of a single benefit. Traffic downtown is horrible (ok, it's terrible here, too, but EVERYONE commutes to downtown; not everyone commutes to Coral Gables). Downtown isn't just ugly; it's one of the most ugly downtown major cities in the country. Something about going to school among the palm trees is, well, I don't know how to quantify it but I'm sure I would've been less attracted to this school if it was housed in an office building downtown. You wouldn't have the Wellness Center or any of the other benefits of being on campus. Parking would be just as bad - presumably if they built a law school downtown they'd build a parking area, but considering how poorly they manage parking on campus that's no sure thing. What else? It just wouldn't feel like being in a campus environment.

On the other hand, law students are here to learn the law so I guess they can learn it anywhere, right? I don't know. I just don't think it's a very good idea because other than being able to say
the law school is downtown near lawyer's offices and the courthouse, there are few benefits. But I bet if they started over, they could get the bathrooms right...

7 Comments:

At 9:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No way! It would blow. You know how many panhandlers would be bothering us. And being amongst the Miami-Dade community college kids . . . Have you seen them? Frightening. No way! It would S-U-C-K!

 
At 1:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you see the february pass rates. http://www.miamiherald.com/416/story/76305.html

Is that exam typically lower than the July one? 76% just doesn't sound good.

 
At 5:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, it is lower because a lot of the people taking the Feb. bar failed the July bar.

 
At 5:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, it is lower because the Feb. bar takers are largely composed of people who failed the bar in July.

 
At 6:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's not the reason - the quoted percentages are for "first-time bar examinees". The overall bar passage rate for the U (according to USNWR, presumably for both tests) is 78.5%, so it's about the same as the other test. The state passage rate overall is 72%.

 
At 11:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to disagree with you on this one.

At least moving the school downtown would be a change. A perception exists among the students--or at least many with whom I speak--that the administration, and UM as a whole, does little to improve UM Law. We have a strong faculty, but our facilities leave a lot to be desired. The paint and the sand on the Bricks are nice, but it would be great to plug one's laptop into an outlet that actually works.

A decision to move downtown to a new, state-of-the-art facility would send a message that we are committed to bettering the school, not languishing in the second tier. But see Law Dragon. And not that I play the rankings game, but Stetson is now a tier-two school, and FIU has vaulted to the third tier. Those are our competitors, even though we may not want to admit it. We, too, need to continue to improve.

 
At 8:33 AM, Blogger some guy said...

I fully agree with you that the facilities here are less than adequate. Even faculty members complain about the cramped conditions, bug infestations and filth. I've blogged ad nauseum about the stench emanating from bathrooms, third-world style plumbing and 1996 technology infrastructure.

But I don't know why tearing it up and building a new facility downtown is the answer. Pumping in a few million dollars in improvements (real improvements, not the cursory stuff they do every year around reunion time) to the one we have here would make more sense.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home