Filling the classroom

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

On recent cold, snowy morning, Peter Alexander was preparing for a trip to South Bend to make his pitch to potential students as to why his law school – which is not built, not opened and not accredited – is better than the established law schools.

The dean of Indiana Tech Law School was headed to the University of Notre Dame where he planned to meet privately with pre-law students one-on-one. He would show them a PowerPoint presentation, answer questions and tell the prospects how Indiana Tech’s approach will be different from convention.

What those students heard may not be that much different from what established law schools are telling them.

indtech-exterior-15col.jpg Construction of the building which will house the new Indiana Tech Law School is two months ahead of schedule and under budget. The school is scheduled to open in August.(Photo submitted)

Alexander is touting his curriculum as providing more real-world experience along with the traditional theory. Law clinics, classroom lectures by practicing attorneys and judges to explain how centuries-old legal precedent applies to the 21st century, and assigning a mentor to every law student are part of Indiana Tech’s integrated curriculum.

Even while law schools are looking to add more practical training for its students, critics are unimpressed with Alexander’s ideas. Peter Campos, law professor at the University of Colorado Law School, blogged that Indiana Tech was a “legal diploma mill in a hyper-saturated market” and dismissed Alexander’s assertions the school will be distinguished by its emphasis on ethics and professionalism.

The Indiana Tech dean said his school is instituting the recommendations made in the 1992 “Legal Education and Professional Development: An Educational Continuum,” known as the MacCrate Report. Law schools created task forces after this report was published to determine how they could provide the education the report called for but, Alexander said, those schools have spent the past decades “naval gazing.”

As for Campos’ sharp comments, Alexander said the Colorado law professor feels threatened because at Indiana Tech “we don’t do the same cookie-cutter legal education like he’s doing.”

Construction on the new Indiana Tech Law School building on the Fort Wayne campus is currently two months ahead of schedule and under budget. In early December, the school announced it had received a collection of law books for its library from an anonymous donor.

To date, it has hired 10 faculty including the most recent addition of Judith Klaswick Fitzgerald, judge of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Alexander said the school is looking to add one more faculty member.

Indiana Tech is still planning to open in August 2013 and an early indication of the school’s success will be its ability to attract students. The school has set the goal of 100 for the inaugural class and, although only 10 students have been admitted, Alexander remains optimistic the first class will reach the ambitious benchmark.

Students will not only have to buy Alexander’s pitch but also be willing to pay $29,500 for tuition with another $830 in fees.

Preparing for his trip to Notre Dame, Alexander was not worried.

“I really do believe our students will get a better value for their dollar,” he said.•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?