Yesterday, the Board of Higher Education approved a plan for UMass Dartmouth to accept the assets of Southern New England School of Law as a gift, and to thereby operate a public law school in Massachusetts.
I think this plan is a mistake at this time.
When you listen to proponents of the plan, it sounds like a great idea. After all, how could the state turn down a gift like this one, one that involves an entire private law school? Having a public law school would create additional affordable education opportunities for Massachusetts residents. It also would increase our stock of public interest lawyers and it would improve the diversity of our legal community.
So why would we say “no?”
Well, the problem lies in the fact that Southern New England School of Law is not accredited by the American Bar Association. That limits what its students can do after graduation and thereby makes it a less competitive option than other accredited law schools.
The main reason Southern New England School of Law is not accredited in the first place is because it lacks the financial capacity to invest in itself and to make improvements needed to be accepted, things like adding to its law library collection. That’s why it offered itself to the state – the state has public funds to invest in the school that aren’t available to the private institution. Under the Board of Higher Education’s decision yesterday, that responsibility now lies with the state.
These are taxpayer dollars we’re talking about. I say that now is not the time for our state to put investing in a public law school at the head of our education priority list. UMass has already been forced to make cutbacks in its regular course offerings because of budget cuts. Why put more responsibility on its plate when it can’t meet its existing obligations? And why should we invest in ideas like this one when we have other education responsibilities we can’t meet, like funding Chapter 70 for cities and towns and improving under-performing school districts?
If you ask me, this is a bad idea for our state right now. But, now I’m asking you. What do you think? Is the Board of Higher Education’s vote a good one, or will this “gift” end up costing our state too much money? Please post a comment and let’s get a discussion going.
Showing posts with label UMass. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UMass. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Monday, November 16, 2009
Thought of the Day - 11/16/2009
When you think of good ways our state could spend taxpayer dollars in times like these, does creating a new law school in the UMass system come to mind as a priority?
Well, for some people, that’s exactly what’s on their mind.
There is a plan underway for the state to merge the privately-owned Southern New England School of Law (SNESL) into the UMass/Dartmouth campus. It’s an idea that first surfaced back in 2005, and which has been floating around ever since.
SNESL wants to merge because it is unable to make the large investment of money needed to bring its programs and facilities up to standards needed for accreditation by the American Bar Association. Without accreditation, SNESL is less competitive than many other law schools because its students are limited in the number of states in which they can be admitted to practice after graduation.
Massachusetts is one of only a few states that don’t include a law school in their public higher education offerings. There’s no question that a law school would enhance the variety of programs UMass could offer to its students. That would not only make the school more competitive and prestigious with other universities, but also would provide Massachusetts students with a quality and affordable option to attend law school.
Under the merger plan, SNESL would essentially give its assets to UMass for free. But, it would be up to UMass to make any changes and investments after that.
And that’s where this intriguing idea stops making good sense.
Massachusetts is in the middle of a fiscal crisis that’s forcing us to cut back the programs and services we’re already offering through the UMass system. In fact, later this week, the Legislature is poised to vote of about $277 million of budget cuts that are necessary to keep our budget in balance, and some of those cuts could affect core services the UMass system already offers. We can’t afford to make the changes necessary to make a public law school work at UMass right now, and there’s no guarantee we could devote proper resources to the school at any time in the near future. That would actually be a disservice to students, and it makes this a bad deal right now.
There’s an editorial in today’s Boston Herald on this subject, and they end it with the line that this plan is “the wrong deal at the wrong time in the wrong place.” I agree. We simply don’t have the resources necessary to make the plan work right now, and that would turn this “gift” into a long-term problem for our state.
What do you think? Would adding a law school to UMass be a good idea? Please let me know by posting your thoughts below.
Well, for some people, that’s exactly what’s on their mind.
There is a plan underway for the state to merge the privately-owned Southern New England School of Law (SNESL) into the UMass/Dartmouth campus. It’s an idea that first surfaced back in 2005, and which has been floating around ever since.
SNESL wants to merge because it is unable to make the large investment of money needed to bring its programs and facilities up to standards needed for accreditation by the American Bar Association. Without accreditation, SNESL is less competitive than many other law schools because its students are limited in the number of states in which they can be admitted to practice after graduation.
Massachusetts is one of only a few states that don’t include a law school in their public higher education offerings. There’s no question that a law school would enhance the variety of programs UMass could offer to its students. That would not only make the school more competitive and prestigious with other universities, but also would provide Massachusetts students with a quality and affordable option to attend law school.
Under the merger plan, SNESL would essentially give its assets to UMass for free. But, it would be up to UMass to make any changes and investments after that.
And that’s where this intriguing idea stops making good sense.
Massachusetts is in the middle of a fiscal crisis that’s forcing us to cut back the programs and services we’re already offering through the UMass system. In fact, later this week, the Legislature is poised to vote of about $277 million of budget cuts that are necessary to keep our budget in balance, and some of those cuts could affect core services the UMass system already offers. We can’t afford to make the changes necessary to make a public law school work at UMass right now, and there’s no guarantee we could devote proper resources to the school at any time in the near future. That would actually be a disservice to students, and it makes this a bad deal right now.
There’s an editorial in today’s Boston Herald on this subject, and they end it with the line that this plan is “the wrong deal at the wrong time in the wrong place.” I agree. We simply don’t have the resources necessary to make the plan work right now, and that would turn this “gift” into a long-term problem for our state.
What do you think? Would adding a law school to UMass be a good idea? Please let me know by posting your thoughts below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)