TaxProf Blog

Editor: Paul L. Caron
Pepperdine University School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Pasquale Responds to Tamanaha: A 'Torrent of Words' on the Value of Law School

Following up on this morning's post, Tamanaha Responds to Leiter (and Leiter Replies):  Frank Pasquale (Maryland), A "Torrent of Words" on the Value of Law School:

Professor Tamanaha (BT) complains that Simkovic and MacIntyre (SM) have unleashed a "torrent of words" in response to his criticism.  ... SM have responded to a fusillade of criticism, much of it ill-informed.  BT is welcome to dismiss their work, but as he does so, he should also be more cautious about his own claims.  If the "law school reform" movement simply cannot acknowledge a piece of "good news" about legal education, it risks looking like the more dubious branches of "tort reform," driven by motives far afield from its stated aim of helping consumers.

Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/07/pasquale-responds.html

Legal Education | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef01901e8bd2dd970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Pasquale Responds to Tamanaha: A 'Torrent of Words' on the Value of Law School:

Comments

Just to be sure readers have the context, I am pasting in some of the rest of the post below. Links are available back at the Balkinization blog.

1) Tamanaha (BT) claimed that 16 years of data was insufficient for their study. SM have demonstrated that "We use better (and more) data than studies Tamanaha praised in his book." BT appears to have a double standard: predictions of doom get a pass, but SM's work merited vituperative attacks immediately upon its release.

2) BT claimed that SM were "cherrypicking data." The pair immediately gave scientific explanations for their data set. They also suggest that BT is guilty of the very opportunistic use of data he accused them of.

3) BT has claimed that SM's research could mislead current applicants about the current value of legal education. SM respond that "We would have to be off by 85% for our basic conclusion to be incorrect."

Posted by: Frank | Jul 31, 2013 3:02:20 PM