UH Law School Admissions Controversy
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1994-11-27
Guests: Joanne Punu (Assistant Dean, UH Law School); Dick Miller (Dean Emeritus, UH Law School)
Duration: 1:07:05

[0:00:02] Randall Roth: Good morning. This is Randy Roth, host of The Price of Paradise Radio Show. Today's topic is the UH School of Law. With me in the studio to discuss these and related matters are Joanne Punu, the law school's Director of Admissions, and Dick Miller, a long-time member of the faculty.
[0:01:54] Joanne Punu: Oh, sure, Randy, and I guess one of the things I want to say in preface is that there have been a number of incorrect statements made in the press, and we've made a number of efforts to get it corrected and it's kind of stuck on the wall even though President Mortimer in his press conference had misspoken a bit about the process.
[0:02:35] Randall Roth: So there is some subjectivity involved in the process?
[0:02:38] Joanne Punu: Absolutely, I think when you talk about admissions in any context, undergraduate medical school, professional school graduate, you're talking about a framework. You're looking at number one, a mission, an idea of what you are and and and and what you want and why you are that way.
[0:03:28] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, the expression merit-based admission policy has been used as opposed to some other way of making these decisions. If it's subjective, um, how do you ensure that it's merit-based?
[0:03:42] Joanne Punu: Well, the subjectivity comes in for example, when I talked about this framework, number one, a mission, who you are and why you're why you are the way you are is number one, a subjective identification. What are what are we here to do? And why are we going to do that? That is an objective. That isn't something you can stand out there and necessarily measure.
[0:04:35] Randall Roth: And this is what in the media, recently, has been referred to as community service. You're saying it's much broader than that.
[0:04:41] Joanne Punu: It is absolutely much broader. At the moment, an individual's application is reviewed in three fairly equal parts, one being the academic record. And this has also been misnamed in the press. It keeps being called the GPA, the grade point average in effect. That is simply not true.
[0:05:18] Randall Roth: And some schools, I assume, have grade levels much higher than other schools.
[0:05:22] Joanne Punu: That's correct. We have to look at whether a school's grading practices affect the GPA. We need to look at whether the individual completed graduate work on top of the bachelor's degree.
[0:05:40] Randall Roth: Tell me a little bit about that personal factor, the third of the three factors. And then I want to ask Professor Miller about mission. You've mentioned that word a few times, but what about the personnel factor?
[0:05:52] Joanne Punu: Well, the personal factors are what I frankly have kind of coined the phrase to describe a collection of again, difficult to measure qualities that the individual could bring to the process, one of which is community service.
[0:06:55] Randall Roth: Well I can't resist asking one last question before I get to mission, and that is, as long as you've been Director of Admissions, do you feel that there has been, um, whether or not there's been attempts at political influence, do you feel that any decisions have been influenced by politics?
[0:07:15] Joanne Punu: No.
[0:07:17] Randall Roth: Thank you. Uh, Dick Miller, you've been not just around for a long time. You are the only member of the faculty who was on the original faculty. So you've been around for the entire uh lifetime of the law school. This question of mission, uh, also has been in the media a great deal. Um, does the law school, in in your mind, have a real clear mission that was given to it 22 years ago? Um, tell us a little bit about the circumstances uh at the time the law school was created.
[0:09:05] Dick Miller: Well, I think the, um, the University of Hawaii Law School was probably, before it came into existence, the most studied law school in the history of the United States. There were something on the order of five separate studies, um, one by some national figures. I think Bayless Manning, who was at one time Dean at Stanford, participated and the Tom Erlick and another national figure in one study. There was a study by the LRB, uh, which was done by our own Norm Miller, who was in the political science department. There was another study done by, uh, I think by Mildred Kosaki, a very distinguished uh, person in this community, and the wife of Dick Kosaki, who was Chancellor at one time of the University, and uh there may have been a couple others, actually. What they all looked at was all the possible good that a or bad that a law school can bring to a community. And uh, there are a number of, uh, things that a law school does, uh, besides educating students, and that is, uh, it engages in, uh, scholarly legal research, particularly with regard to, um, the law of the state in which it's located, particularly a state law school. And that was certainly one goal to have some institution that could take a look at what was happening in the legal system and try to, uh, criticize it and to, uh, improve it.
[0:10:29] Randall Roth: Well now, I I know that's something that's being done right now and yet there are folks in the legislature and I don't know whether it's a couple or or many, many more, but there are some folks who've indicated a belief that somehow or another we've gotten off the track, that the law school is going in a different direction than was originally contemplated. Uh, what do you think about that?
[0:10:50] Dick Miller: Well, I think uh, that there never was a clear, clear-cut, uh, legislative history about what specifically the mission of the law school was, other than to do all these wonderful things that each of these reports, uh, called for, that is providing important input into the community and training people to work in justice, uh, areas. But there was something else going on at the time and I think you have to go back to why the law school was, one of the main reasons that there was an impetus to create a law school and that was, I think that, uh, you have to go back to the almost to the Second World War when uh, many, many brave and heroic, uh, people came back after the end of the Second World War to Hawaii, especially the 442nd and they had then the G.I. Bill and it was a very good G.I. Bill that actually provided tuition, and paid tuition for, uh, for education. And, uh, a significant number of the people coming back to Hawaii, um, went into law school. And law school, uh, became at that point a jumping off place for people, many of whom were sons and daughters or grandsons and granddaughters of plantation workers who, if you go back into the history of Hawaii, uh, were really terribly prejudiced against before the Second World War, particularly, and perhaps continuing during the Second World War, when the society was run by the the big five, and where, uh, people of color really had a difficult time breaking into the to the system. So, these people came back, some of them got legal education because of the G.I. bill, they got together and uh, in the Democratic Party and created, in effect, a a revolution, a a peaceful revolution, which occurred uh, after statehood.
[0:12:34] Randall Roth: So the creation of the law school was somehow a part of what might be generally called the Democratic Revolution?
[0:13:00] Dick Miller: I would, I would think that that is the case. Uh, Jim Burns created a law school and a he was very much in favor of a medical school. Uh, and part of, son of Governor Burns. Uh, excuse me. I, no, no, it was John Burns, his father. Right. Okay. Uh, and, uh, what was happening at that time was that, uh, local kids were who wanted to get a legal education and who were qualified for legal education, were having difficulty getting one on the mainland. There was no law school here. Was that just a function of finances or were there other reasons? Well, certainly, finances was a very significant reason, but keep in mind that all law schools, to some extent, regulate the number of non-residents. So applying to a school on the mainland meant they were treated as a non-resident and therefore there was only a small uh, a small uh, uh opening for non-residents. Secondly, there was discrimination in those days, uh, and so if they were Japanese or part Japanese or part Chinese or a mixture of part Hawaiian, they might have difficulty getting into a law school and, uh, uh, so a real political motive to create a law school was to create opportunities, I think for local residents, meaning these very people, sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters of, uh, of plantation workers, uh, to be able to get a legal education so that they could then step in and and continue the revolution if as it were.
[0:14:15] Randall Roth: Joanne?
[0:14:23] Joanne Punu: Uh, yeah, Randy, I just wanted to add something to what, uh, Dick was saying. Um, it might be helpful for your listeners if they had an idea what the current mission statement is for the law school and, without reading it in great detail, to give you the, the main points of it: to provide formal legal education, to encourage and support scholarly legal research, to promote justice in our society and professional responsibility and, and public service within our profession. We also share the goals of advancing the areas of environmental law, Pacific and Asian legal studies, and the law of the sea. Now, one of the things in this debate that's come up is, are we being true to our mission, but no one has mentioned that missions are subject to change and adaptation and need to be evaluated periodically. For example, in 1986, when I first joined the law school, there was no such thing as environmental law. And yet at that time there was a critical need in the state to begin to address her address in a legal framework, our fragile ecosystems. Today, a mere 8 years later, we have one of the strongest environmental law programs, and that is embedded in our mission statement and that is an appropriate, I think, adaptation. So one needs to debate the role of mission over time as well. The second thing is when Dick was talking about the climate in the in the early 70s, um, I would also add that women were having an extremely difficult time all over the country, um, getting admitted to law school, and, and, and although that has never been, to my knowledge, spoken of as part of the original mission and founding of the law school, I think it's important to note one thing, the admissions climate throughout the country has changed dramatically since 1973 when the law school first opens it opened its doors, and, in fact, the, the access to legal education for both women and persons of color is just dramatically improved. It's almost immeasurable.
[0:16:34] Dick Miller: Uh, that let me just emphasize that that those early conditions where people, uh, uh, local people, and local, in quotes, could not get admitted to a law school, have have have been turned over as far as law schools across the country are concerned. So now those people become desirable candidates. They fulfill affirmative action goals, and furthermore, uh, there are many, many more, uh, uh, financial resources made available to them, particularly if have they have a good record. So there are opportunities that exist now that didn't exist then, uh, and that explains really, uh, some of the change in the people who are applying to the law school. We're still getting local residents, but the success of the law school has meant that those applications, uh, now, uh, are getting better and better every year.
[0:17:19] Randall Roth: So Joanne, if if somebody who's a Hawaii resident is, um, say of Japanese ancestry or Chinese ancestry, somebody who would be considered a minority person on the mainland but not considered a minority person subject to affirmative action in Hawaii, what I think I hear Dick saying is that that person might actually have an easier time getting into a mainland law school because of their affirmative action, than they would have here in Hawaii, is that correct?
[0:17:47] Joanne Punu: Absolutely and unequivocally. Um, even individuals that we admit every year from the resident pool, I Every year I have my heart broken. In the admissions process, I see what I think is is this wonderful local applicant who appears to demonstrate a clear need to be in Hawaii, especially by reading their personal statement. They it sounds like that they have some economic disadvantage and that this would be the perfect place for that individual. And that individual has cleared this the admissions screening process. And then the individual says, I'm going elsewhere and invariably, it's to a private, very expensive law school. So there must have been financial Well, with my need to know, I ask as as you can imagine because it's part of the evaluation process I spoke of earlier, and I am surprised to hear how many schools are are ready to offer major financial support in the form of outright grants and scholarships to a lot of Hawaii residents of color. So the affirmative action is not just with respect to admissions, but financial assistance as well.
[0:19:00] Randall Roth: even be admitting nonresidents, that this law school is paid for by the taxpayers of Hawaii and it should be for the sons and daughters of the people of Hawaii. Um, you mentioned a resident pool, non-resident pool. Can you tell us a little bit about how many non-residents are there at the University of Hawaii? How does that work?
[0:19:20] Joanne Punu: Well, um, as you probably read in the press, the Board of Governors or the Board of Regents of the University has established an overall university ceiling of 20% non-resident enrollment. Now, they've said very clearly that that is not program specific, and the Regents reserve the right, of course, to change that figure and or to leave it and then still impose a different figure for an individual program, such as the law school.
[0:19:46] Joanne Punu: However, our own faculty has come up with an even more stringent number, to be frank, and um, they haven't used the 20% that they theoretically are entitled to, and in fact have set a maximum of 15, 15% on an entering class. And it's rare that we would even seek that. Typically, a class might have 10 or 12% non-residents. And and who those non-residents are is very interesting, too. That will include, for example, perhaps a student or two from China or Japan, a number of students from the Pacific Islands, which is also part of our mission to to enhance the Pacific Asian Legal Studies program.
[0:20:23] Randall Roth: So we're only talking about maybe three or four? No, we're talking maybe 7 to 10 individuals. But I mean, once, why don't you take out the people from the Pacific Islands and from China and Thailand or what have you? That kids from the mainland were maybe looking at three or four.
[0:20:38] Joanne Punu: Maybe five. What might three to five. are are they go ahead. And they're special in in the sense that they tend to survive the competition, not just because they bring very strong academic background which we would require, obviously, of nonresidents. But because they address again, some particular areas that we're trying to pursue. Pacific Asian Legal Studies, for example, they may have um undergraduate and graduate work in Asian studies, perhaps um Japanese studies. They they are um language skills are extremely high in an Asian or Pacific language. They've spent time in the culture and in the country, and we think that that non-resident is a special non-resident in the sense that they will bring something to our student body.
[0:21:22] Joanne Punu: The non-resident resident debate is frankly in my mind an educational values debate. What does someone from outside your frame of thinking bring to your frame of thinking? And you have to remember this is an academic exercise. We're asking people to open their minds. We're asking people to allow themselves to become better educated. And so the wider spread of ideas you can expose someone to, the more compelling the education. Um and I think that is something of a defense for the diversity that a non-resident, a particular type of non-resident would bring.
[0:21:59] Randall Roth: Okay. This is the Price of Paradise radio show. Our topic today is the UH School of Law. Our guests are Assistant Dean Joanne Punu, who's director of admissions, and Professor Dick Miller, who's been on the faculty since the very beginning. If you'd like to join in the conversation by asking a question or making a comment, just call us at 955-8821. Neighbor Islanders are always invited to call collect. The number again, 955-8821. Dick?
[0:22:27] Dick Miller: I I first, I want to just uh reaffirm what Joanne said that is that all the great institutions, the great law schools, those that are considered uh uh law schools that that everyone would like to send their uh son or daughter to, uh do admit people from a wide range of places. In other words, the diversity of a student body that is not just limited to local is a very important factor in creating a great law school. But there's also a very practical reason for a state like Hawaii to uh continue to uh leave open the possibility of non-residents and that is because most of the, I would say the most of the uh young people in Hawaii who want to get a legal education, go to the mainland for it, and they go to schools which do allow non-residents to attend. In other words, it's a reciprocal thing. Uh so that every state law school, Hastings for example, is a very popular place for Hawaii students to go. That's a California law school. If they had a restrictive policy on non-residents then our uh applicants from Hawaii wouldn't get in there. So it makes good sense on a reciprocal basis not to shut down the the door to having non-residents. But having said that, the number of non-residents that we have, and I want to repeat that, is extraordinarily small.
[0:23:50] Randall Roth: Well and in fact, as I'm sitting here listening to this, I'm thinking a lot of listeners are probably saying, well, why do you cap it at 15%? Why wouldn't that percentage be higher, but I guess this is where um the politics comes into play a bit and and Dick, could you tell us a little bit about these resolutions that were introduced in the the state legislature, both uh the house and the Senate, this last session, what's that all about?
[0:24:13] Dick Miller: Well, I think that goes back to this original notion that that the school really in some way uh ought to be for um local people, the original uh mission, the original reason, because of the old discrimination that people of who are quote local, unquote, and that is people who grew up here or people who went to high school here should have some sort of uh priority and unfortunately, in the legislature what happens is there are a lot of uh young people uh go to college and either while they're in college or after they graduate, they get jobs in the legislature as legislative assistants uh and then all of often they apply to law school as a logical place for them to go. And uh often they because of the competitiveness or because of their own qualifications don't make the cut at the law school and get turned down and uh uh and their bosses who are members of the legislature, sort of have to watch this and uh they think very highly of these people, why didn't they get into law school? So the obvious thing to do is to start calling up and saying, what are you, what are you guys doing down there? Who are you admitting? In fact these resolutions I guess were a very formal way of saying what are you guys doing, right? What's your mission, uh, you know, what's your admissions policies, etcetera.
[0:25:33] Randall Roth: Yeah, right. Why can't my guys get in? That's really what, Joanne, you were a part of uh of that?
[0:25:37] Joanne Punu: Yes, and and and to be frank, I I I don't think it it it took much to see that it was more than just asking, what are you guys doing down there? There was also a bias, you didn't even really have to read between the lines to see that there are clearly people who want to change the way our admissions process works, that it was more than just asking questions. How would they like to see it changed? What what specific things? Well, if I if I hear their public statements as they're even being resurrected today, it's more emphasis on quote community service and are the criterion Like Like working for in the legislature? Well, well, one would one would think, I mean it's tough to define community service, right? Absolutely. And and you know, for example, you want to talk about the lack of subjectivity. This is an area we're extremely careful in on the admissions committee to try not to to say that a particular type of community service is better than another. We use a broad brush in looking at it. Does this in general benefit the community at large or a subset of the community? For example, I do not particularly want to get into a debate over whether um volunteering at an AIDS hospice is more valuable or less valuable than special Olympics work. And by the way, working at the legislator, legislature Um, you working for pay? Working is working. That is not a community service as opposed to volunteering. Correct. Correct. Now, if someone wishes to volunteer at our legislature or at our courts, that is clearly a form of community service, where you are giving something without expecting a lot in return. Um, being employed at the legislature is employment and it we keep that separate in the process.
[0:27:27] Randall Roth: Um, Dick has used the word local a couple times and I know sometimes people will use that to distinguish a long time resident from somebody else and other times there's a uh uh an ethnic element to that. Just real briefly, could you tell us, what is the ethnic breakdown of the student body at at the law school, whether it be now or just generally over the last five or 10 years?
[0:28:21] Joanne Punu: Okay. Um, I I I'll give you a general idea over 10 years, uh, last five years because these things fluctuate in a given year and it would be misleading. Are are there groups that are generally overrepresented and groups that are generally underrepresented over a period of time, or is it pretty much a reflection of of the community here in Hawaii? It's pretty much a reflection, although I I will tell you that there's certain groups that we are working on a little bit to attract. Um, we have always had a special Aloha for native Hawaiians at the law school since the school's inception and and we work very, very hard to attract native Hawaiians to the legal profession. And and I think have done a a remarkable job prior to the opening of the law school, 1973, the bar's assessment is that you could count on one hand the number of native Hawaiian attorneys in the community. Today, 20 odd years later, um, there are approximately 15% of our graduates, which would put it at a couple of hundred native Hawaiian attorneys. Um, So it's dramatically increased the percentage of the bar, I mean, yeah. Oh, dramatically. Yeah, dramatically. I think one of the initiatives we're paying a closer attention to now is is Filipinos, um and and this is partly getting back to what's happening in undergraduate education. You need to have the bachelor's degree to come to law school, so your retention rates have to be decent at at the undergraduate level. And we're having now new initiatives on the Manoa campus through the diversity um office to really try to improve the retention both of native Hawaiians, Filipinos, and Pacific Islanders. What about the the two largest categories, Caucasians and and uh Japanese? Well, let's say over a five year period, a class will typically have approximately 25 to 30% Caucasian, fluctuating um and That's pretty close, I assume, to the population of Hawaii? Um, Well, uh, let me see. I have here some statistics from the advertiser. I can only use theirs. They say the Caucasian population in 1990 by the census was a 33%. I've also seen different numbers, so it's close. Well, I tell you what, I want to come back but we have uh a special caller on the line. Judge David Ezra, Federal District Court Judge here in Honolulu. David? Yes, good morning. Well, Welcome to the Price of Paradise show. Thank you. Good morning. What uh what can you tell us today? Well, you were speaking, I think uh a few minutes ago about the uh situation up at the legislature and I think uh both uh Dick and Joanne know that I joined uh Dean Harrison in testifying at the legislature against uh those resolutions and I did so because of uh my concern that uh the perception not be communicated throughout the uh community that our law school was in some way uh, uh, if you will, uh losing its uh high standards of admission and and somehow uh bowing to uh political pressure which is something I think uh uh would be a very uh serious uh mistake and and I think it would be uh extremely detrimental to the uh graduates of the law school, both those that have graduated in the past, and I think those that uh are there now and and even those that may come to in the future. I think it's absolutely imperative that the hard work and and dedication uh shown by the students and the faculty and in bringing the law school to its high uh plane, uh the place it is today, uh be maintained. Uh-huh. Wasn't always the case, Randy, as you may remember. I think that's right. Is it your impression, David, that the legislature has decided uh that everything is is going in in an appropriate direction at the law school, or do you think something like those resolutions that were discussed earlier this year are going to come up again next year? Well, I'm a I'm a federal judge. I I have no connection directly with the state legislature, so I can't answer that that question. I I know uh that there are certain uh legislators that I happen to know privately, who are uh just as concerned about uh maintaining the standards of the law school as I think uh most of the residents of Hawaii are. Obviously there may be legislators and and I don't know this for a fact, but there may be uh who have a different view, uh who believe that uh uh admissions to the law school should be much more flexible if if you will. Mhm. Mhm. Uh Dick Miller, I think has something to say about that. Uh Good morning, Judge Ezra. Good morning. Uh while we have you on the phone, I have uh I've been thinking about this and it seems to me that there is a a belief or a hope perhaps among some people in the legislature that we would uh give uh preference somehow to long-term uh local residents that as opposed to uh a shorter term uh residents and it uh it seems to me that that probably would be not only uh uh immoral but possibly unlawful. Do you have any comment about that? Well, I can't uh I I wish I could uh make a comment, Dick, but I can't uh because that's the kind of issue that may eventually end up uh somewhere uh before one of our federal courts. I think uh uh because people do sue, as you know. Yes, I do. Yeah. All right, we could probably predict that as a matter of fact. Go ahead. Yes. I I I think however that uh from a not from a legal standpoint but but but more from a philosophical one, um I think it's important that uh we maintain at the law school not just a reputation of excellence locally, but that we maintain one nationally. And I think this is important for several reasons. In order to retain and uh and attract uh high quality faculty, uh we need to have a school from which those faculty can feel that they're enriching themselves, their reputations personally and and from which they feel they can teach uh effectively. You know that uh yourself and I think that's important. Secondly, despite the fact that I think the and properly so, the mission of the law school should be to train uh young uh men and women, and when I say young I use that advisedly because I have many uh students in my classes who are who are older students uh let's say young young in the law uh to practice law or to go into a profession uh which involves the law uh here in Hawaii, we also have to recognize that some of our students through circumstances, even our local students, people who have lived here all their lives, uh must uh travel to the mainland. I've had many students, uh who uh throughout the years and I've taught up there on and off since 1978. So it's been a while, uh have uh asked me to assist them and give writing recommendations when they've had to move to the mainland through family circumstances uh and so forth and they need to get uh positions uh at law firms and uh in in in the corporate world on the mainland. And it's important that their degree means something there as well as here. We don't want to just have students who graduate from our law school who are basically captive uh of the state of Hawaii. We, you know, although as I said, I believe that the primary purpose and mission of the law school should be to train people to practice law and to live in Hawaii. Um it is also true that occasionally uh they need to uh they need to move. And uh and I think also it's important that uh we have a high reputation here locally because our local students are competing for jobs and and and and the job market in the in the legal profession today is not what it was 10 or 15 years ago. are competing for jobs with graduates of uh such fine law schools as Stanford, Michigan, uh Harvard, uh Yale, uh and others. And uh if the perception is that the students of the University of Hawaii law school are are uh simply there because uh uh they knew who they uh they knew somebody of influence, uh rather than the uh than their their quality uh background and in education, I think that's going to be bad news for their uh job prospects even locally.
[0:36:15] Joanne Punu: Excuse me. Yeah. Uh Judge Ezra, good morning. Good morning. Um I wanted to ask you a question. I'm I'm a friend I put you on the spot a little bit, and if you can't answer it I understand, but All right. Um, as you know, a lot of law students uh from UH like the idea of spending a year or two in the courts after graduation as judicial clerks. Um and and and there is a kind of prestige to serving a federal judge um such as yourself. Um Now, you are in the pro you you every year, I assume, have to face selecting um who your clerks judicial clerks will be. We have two positions, so each federal district judge has two positions and to say that we get hundreds of applications uh for each of the for those positions is not exaggerating. I guess my question is you look around and see the the clerks as they perform for Judge Fung, Judge K, um yourself, and how would you say the UH graduates bear relative to the others that you're employing, and what schools are they coming from? Well, uh, I I'm delighted you asked the question. I don't think you put me on the spot uh because I think the answer is uh is is a resounding uh positive one. Uh I uh have had uh two University of Hawaii Law School graduates as as clerks. I have one right now. And uh Judge Fung uh has uh a University of Hawaii Law School graduate as a clerk presently, Judge King has had them uh and uh has one coming in. Uh and so I've had an opportunity to observe their performance as against these very top law students from some of the best uh uh law schools in the country. Um the uh co-clerk uh of my clerk
[0:38:00] Caller: my University of Hawaii law clerk is a graduate of Harvard, for instance. I can tell you that the University of Hawaii law students perform on a par as well and sometimes better than the students who come to us from these mainland law schools. And I don't say that simply because I teach up at the law school. I say that because it's true. And I and I would say that because law clerks are so important to federal judges, we could not afford to hire as a law clerk someone who was not top-notch and able to make the grade, simply because they graduated from a particular law school. It just wouldn't do us any good and and would be disastrous actually. So there's no question, but that they do the job.
[0:38:57] Randall Roth: Thank you, David. We really appreciate your comments.
[0:38:59] Caller: Sure, bye bye.
[0:39:01] Randall Roth: You're listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. Our topic today is the UH School of Law. Our guests here in the studio are assistant Dean Joanne Punnu, who's the director of admissions, and Professor Dick Miller, who's been on the faculty since the very beginning of the law school. If you'd like to join in the conversation, just call 955-8821. Joanne, the more we talk about all of this, the more I realize that this distinction between the resident and the non-resident is a tremendously important one. Who makes that determination and how do they do it?
[0:39:34] Joanne Punu: Well, the University has a formal process. It's the University residency office decides whether for tuition purposes, someone is a resident or a non-resident.
[0:39:43] Randall Roth: And they're separate from the law school?
[0:39:46] Joanne Punu: They are separate actually. They do it for the entire university. However, I think it's important to understand that that black and white distinction can be very dangerous in the admissions process. Um, for one thing, we have a number of Hawaii folks, long time Hawaii residents, born and raised here, went to high school here, went to mainland for undergraduate and perhaps stay a year or two to gain some work experience prior to returning home. Regretfully, they will be classified as a non-resident, so it is up to the admissions committee to make a judgment about whether for admissions purposes this person is really, in fact, a returning resident. Now, the university may require that individual to pay non-resident tuition and to reestablish residency, and we have no quarrel with that.
[0:40:35] Randall Roth: And in our statistics, that person would show up as a non-resident.
[0:40:38] Joanne Punu: Yes, that person does show up as a non-resident. We try to footnote it, though, when we do our statistics so that people understand when we're talking about a true non-resident versus a returning resident being temporarily classified as a non-resident.
[0:40:52] Randall Roth: Do you think folks see that footnote? I've got a feeling that that gets lost.
[0:40:57] Joanne Punu: Not too often. We've got a caller on the line. Warren from Waikiki. Warren, you're on the air.
[0:41:02] Caller: Thank you. Uh I've just uh want to ask a question about going to law school and I'm a an older student. I've been out of school now about uh 25, 30 years and I've always wanted to to go to law school and I'm very active in the community. Uh your community service topic, but uh working for uh housing, affordable housing for the people in the community would um my age be held against me, meaning that uh I probably would not have as many productive years to serve the community if I did get in and since the slots are so limited, do you look for uh younger students? I'm in my 50s now.
[0:42:06] Joanne Punu: I can absolutely tell you Warren that age is not an issue for the admissions committee. Um, our current student body's average age is probably about 27, 28, and the age range is probably from 22 to over 50 years old. Um um, early 50s now, although sometimes well, we had a student who graduated last year who became officially became a senior citizen while he was a third year student. So I can honestly tell you that your age is is pretty much not an issue. Um age comes into play when you're looking for diversity in the class that I spoke of, the other diversity. And um if, for example, the classes is appearing very young, um as the committee begins to shape its decisions, they may at that point begin to say we need the wisdom and maturity of some older students and we have a group here that are are competing well in the admissions process. So, in fact, it it can actually, you know, work in in your favor. Now, what's going to matter is frankly what you did with those years. Um how did you how did you spend your life? What what did you use your time doing? That will be a key factor for the committee to look at.
[0:43:37] Dick Miller: Just by way of anecdote, last night I ran into a former student of mine uh who's older than I am. I'm 63. He was a uh uh professor in the university and a dean for a while. And after he retired from the university, he came to law school and at the time there was that raised a problem. How come we're letting this old person in and re taking a seat that could be used for a young person. And uh uh this person has not got all those productive years. Well, what what happened is he got his degree and he's been using them most productively on a pro bono basis, giving of his own services and advice and he's been doing it now, I think probably 12 years and when I saw him last night, he still looks very vital. He'll probably be doing it for another 15 or 20.
[0:44:38] Randall Roth: So evidently, Joanne, whereas currently age doesn't hurt the applicant, perhaps at one time in the past, it might have been a negative factor.
[0:45:06] Joanne Punu: Well, listening to Dick, I'm I'm actually not in my tenure as director of admissions, but listening to Dick who is our emeritus professor here, I uh it sounds like it did. A factor to be very blunt with you, Warren, would be, um, what does the legal employment market do to your age and that's nothing we can control. And, and that's an issue that I urge older students to think about very carefully whether they're going to confront ageism in the legal employment process, which we don't control, regretfully, but. In addition to being director of admissions, Joanne is is director of placements and director of a number of other things and uh I guess the job market's pretty tough generally, Joanne.
[0:45:27] Joanne Punu: That's, it is. It's a tight constrained market and has been for a couple of years and and we're very challenged to get graduates placed.
[0:46:34] Randall Roth: Warren, we appreciate your call.
[0:46:36] Dick Miller: Thank you.
[0:46:37] Randall Roth: Uh, related to the fact that Joanne is director of just about everything. Uh, Dick, we're under a threat of probation at the law school. The American Bar Association, which is our accrediting agency has indicated that uh uh they need to see more funding uh if they're going to um continue to give us their blessing. Um, what's your assessment? Is the threat of probation real and and if so, what what's the reason?
[0:48:02] Dick Miller: Well, when we started off as the law school, we got a tentative approval which was essentially probation. So for the first several years of the law school until 1982, we were on a probationary status. Well, as far as our graduates are concerned, that is irrelevant because all states which require ABA American Bar Association accreditation before you can take a bar exam, all allow it for a probationary institution. In other words, until the accreditation is removed, you still have all the benefits that an accredited institution gets, even though you're on probation. Now, the reality of it is, I think the ABA uh has in the past removed accreditation from a few schools uh because they did not meet the standards of the ABA. And what they're saying to us is that in some cases, mostly for financial reasons, we are beginning to skirt the edges of areas where we fall below the requirements for personnel, for book budget, for maintenance of the buildings and so forth and so on. And they're saying, watch out, this is a problem. And at this point they've said show us what you're going to do. Why shouldn't we lift your probation, which requires the dean and the president of the university to go to them and very quickly, too, I think January 1 is the date, with a with a program for rebuilding the what we've lost in the last couple of years to a point where the ABA can say, okay, you're on the right track.
[0:53:05] Randall Roth: So they're not concerned about the quality of the program, the rigor in the classroom, for example, or the quality of the students coming out, they're looking at the the funding and the library and they're looking at um how many folks are doing the administrative work um that sort of thing.
[0:54:09] Dick Miller: They're looking at the essentially objective requirements. Quantitative, quantitative requirements. In my opinion, the school has always been excellent no matter how bad the the physical situation was. It's always given a very good education, but the ABA uses these numerical qualifications and that's what they're looking at.
[0:55:33] Randall Roth: Okay. We have a caller
[0:57:00] Caller: Yeah, I was I sat on a waitlist in the early days of the law school and got in and it turned out that I didn't because of uneven upbringing, didn't have the emotional underpinnings to succeed. Um, I had the plain ordinary application that everybody else had with a lot of um work experience in administrative law and legislative law, and I cashiered out after a year and a half. However, the education that I got in that time, now I'm multiply disabled, I make use of that education um in the sense of doing a lot of community service. And so, in law school, taking a risk of having me be a student, um I have used what I could get out of the year and a half I was there in order to continue um in environmental areas, in civil rights areas and disability rights law. And I think that that is an aspect of the contribution that the law school makes to the people in the community, even for those of us who are not able to continue.
[0:57:00] Randall Roth: Oh, that's great. I really appreciate your sharing that with us. Joanne, I think you had a comment.
[0:57:00] Joanne Punu: No, I just wanted to say that that Sharon is almost a perfect tribute to to what the law school hopes. And the fact that she chose not to continue her education and yet is still using it to the community's benefit is hats off to you, Sharon.
[0:57:00] Dick Miller: Yeah, that's that's great and I I just want to say that confirms my belief that a legal education is not a narrow professional education. It is a very liberal education and and uh even one or one and a half or two years of it is very valuable in terms of a person's lifelong education.
[0:57:00] Randall Roth: Thank you, Sharon.
[0:57:00] Joanne Punu: Thank you.
[0:57:00] Randall Roth: Uh, Joanne, you had a comment?
[0:57:00] Joanne Punu: Yes. I I wanted to to say something about this community service thing since it's being, you know, um cast about so freely and loosely. Um when I arrived at the law school in 1986, I I came into to be very frank with you a school that um was a very had a very basic core curriculum and a small number of student organizations. And to be honest with you, I did not feel a particular activism among the students for the first couple of years and I I can honestly tell the tell the community that I I think that the school is far more community service oriented today than it ever was in the days when these legislators who attended the school are complaining about or comparing it to. I I'm shocked. We have since 1986 six to two particular student groups that have been established, one the Environmental Law Society and the other the Advocates for Public Interest Law. These did not exist then and that's a that's a form of showing that the student body itself is fomenting more. The fact that we now have a pro bono graduation requirement, all students must give without getting academic credit or or compensation of any form back to the community while they are a law student, a certain number of hours. Now, some critics will say yes, yes, but that came from the students and I say, I rest my case. We are creating we have brought in students with this real activist sense. In addition, we now are struggling financially to maintain but nevertheless offering family law clinics, an elder law clinic, a native Hawaiian rights clinic and these did not exist uh 20 years, 15 years ago, 10 years ago in the law school. So, I am frankly an utterly befuddled by this this um you know criticism of the law school and particularly when it comes from students who graduated recently that that we're not doing enough because we are doing a great deal more and it came from the very students we selected through the admissions process.
[0:57:00] Randall Roth: In case you joined us late, this is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise Radio Show. My guests are Joanne Punu, the director of admissions at the William S. Richardson School of Law and Dick Miller, a longtime member of the law faculty. We're talking about the history and mission of the law school, especially as reflected in admission decisions and policies. You can ask a question or make a comment by calling us at 955-8821. The number again, 955-8821. We have several callers on the line. First Bill from Maui. Bill, you're on the air.
[0:57:00] Caller: Yes. Unlike a lot of other institutions, a law school has a relationship to the bar examinations. Now, if the University of Hawaii applicants to the California Bar are doing as well as anybody else applying to the California Bar, we'll say, that's kind of an objective measure.
[0:57:00] Randall Roth: about the adequacy of the training at the school. Let me ask Joanne if she has knowledge of how I know here in Hawaii, our graduates always do better than the than the the larger pool, but do we have enough statistics to know how they're doing in other states?
[0:57:13] Joanne Punu: Um, we don't have, Bill, that many of our graduates taking the bar exams in other states. Um, some states do automatically report back to the law school, New York, for example. Um, others we have anecdotal information by staying in touch with our alumni. My sense is that our our students who have taken the California bar over the last eight years, which is my history, have exceeded the pass rate in California, which granted is is extremely low. The California bar pass rate tends to be around or less slightly less than 50%. Um, and our graduates tend to, I'd say three out of four.
[0:57:54] Randall Roth: Okay. Bill, thank you for your your question. We've got a number of people on the line. I'm going to move on. Uh Dennis from Kailua. Dennis, you've been waiting patiently. You're on the air.
[0:58:04] Caller: Yes, good morning. Um I um have been involved in the business community uh as a business executive and employer here for about 30 years, uh have an MBA. Um and if I uh were in any other major city in the country that I'm aware of, uh there would be an evening law program um available so that I could continue uh acquiring credentials.
[0:58:28] Caller: And and in a lot of uh cities uh such as Detroit, um having a law degree on top of an MBA, plus a technical degree is a uh a fairly standard uh uh career credential for anyone who's going to go very far. And I'm wondering um if uh if the orientation of the university toward uh supplying future legislators and promoting community involvement, perhaps is bypassing the um the business community and and thereby maybe uh missing a lot of very qualified and very involved people who have been paying taxes for a long time.
[0:59:04] Caller: And also uh maybe missing some major sources of funding from major corporations who would want some of their uh executives to uh to attend an evening law program. Perhaps you could comment on the lack of accessibility to legal education for those who maybe aren't destined to practice law and and who aren't available to um to go to school full-time and and uh abandon their careers for that period of time.
[0:59:29] Randall Roth: Great question. Joanne, any thoughts on that?
[0:59:31] Joanne Punu: Uh yeah. Dennis, the this gets right back to the issue of accreditation. The there are a number of law schools, though not all, that have part-time programs in addition to their full-time day programs, but um the ABA requires a separate accreditation process for that part-time program.
[0:59:49] Joanne Punu: It's almost as if you're running two parallel law schools. Okay? So the ABA will then say, what are your resources for that other program, the part-time one? Um that is a dilemma we're having. You must maintain your core program to satisfy ABA standards. We're already having difficulty funding and and satisfying the standards for the the full-time program. Um this this state would have to make a lot larger financial um commitment to the law school before we could even entertain the notion of seeking approval for a part-time program.
[1:00:24] Joanne Punu: Um I guess a second point I'd ask you to consider too is, and this is a this is a good issue for debate perhaps at another time and um um but the increase in the number of lawyers that would result from a part-time program. Is that a good thing for the community? Can we absorb um that number of lawyers? I have some thoughts on that, but as I said, that's a debate for another day.
[1:00:47] Randall Roth: Uh, Dick Miller, you have a comment?
[1:00:49] Dick Miller: I think of this question of how many lawyers we can absorb. I know that Joanne uh doing placement is very concerned about that, but my view is uh that people want a legal education and are qualified, we ought to try to give it to them, whether there's places or not, because many of the great lawyers, professors, teachers today, they may have gone to law school during the Great Depression when there were no law jobs at all, and it's a lifetime choice. But Joanne is 100% correct that to create a night program and I taught it one at Wayne State, uh means a substantial infusion of uh cash uh from the legislature to increase the number of faculty and to create a separate program.
[1:01:31] Randall Roth: Okay. Thank you, Dennis. We really appreciate your call.
[1:01:34] Caller: Thank you.
[1:01:34] Randall Roth: We have another caller from Honolulu. Levita. Levita, you're on the air.
[1:01:38] Caller: Yes, and and uh you just answered my question. It was going to be whether the school had a part-time program.
[1:01:44] Randall Roth: Okay, thank you very much.
[1:01:46] Joanne Punu: We get a lot of requests for that Randy. Um um, you know, in the course of answering questions, the admissions here, there's clear that there's a large number of people who want it. And when we explain this whole separate accreditation and separate funding process, they they're actually very surprised to hear that and and um very understanding of it.
[1:02:05] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, we just have a few minutes left, and and I know both of you have commented on numerous occasions of, you know, how, how proud we all are of of the graduates over the entire 20 plus years. Um, but any thoughts on how the student makeup, whether it's uh in a uh quantitative way, looking at statistics, or in some other way, how they that student body is changed over the last 20 plus years?
[1:02:32] Dick Miller: Dick, any thoughts?
[1:02:34] Dick Miller: Well, I think what's happened as the opportunities uh on the mainland for um people here have uh increased substantially. And as the reputation of the school is gone up, what's what's obviously happened is that our the uh academic credentials of those students who come to law school have increased substantially over the last few years, and everyone recognizes that. That is, it is competitive, all law schools' applications uh across the country are competitive. We're getting better ones. People recognize that our law school going here uh has great advantages, particularly if you're going to practice in Hawaii. So the student body has improved. Now let me just say one thing and that relates to the suggestion perhaps by President Mortimer, if you've read some of the editorials uh lately, that maybe we don't need a law school or that uh it's an added expense that we don't need. Keep in mind that every year, the law school turns out about 75 students. Roughly overtime, 100% of those uh who stay in Hawaii, and that's about about 90, 95%, get placed in good professional jobs in the state of Hawaii. Now that is a wonderful record because one of the big problems we have is educating people in Hawaii who have to leave the state in order to find work. So legal education for students in Hawaii is a place where they can work in Hawaii at well-paying jobs and stay here with their families.
[1:07:05] Randall Roth: Okay. Joanne, any thoughts about how the student body has changed over the last 20 plus years?
[1:07:05] Joanne Punu: Well, I haven't been there 20 years, so I don't have a kind of affective feeling But you've seen the statistics and I know you're a numbers person. I have I have seen the statistics, and I can tell you that even I have seen a change in 8 to 9 years over the student body. And clearly the the application numbers have increased dramatically. When I first got there, we got 350 applications. Eight years, nine years later, we're getting 800, more than double. Um that tends to to make a more competitive process. And yes, the quantitative profile, LSAT test scores, academic preparation is definitely and markedly higher than it was even when I came in in in 86. But the other thing and I mentioned it before and I want to reiterate it. When I came, I thought we had a a student body that was very well rounded and and bright and sharp, even in 1986. But this new group is, I see an activism among our students. We have, you know, lots of native Hawaiians very involved in sovereignty issues, people involved in the environment, and I see a a kind of a new breed of activism among our students.
[1:07:05] Randall Roth: Okay. I want to thank my guest today, Joanne Punu and Dick Miller, both from the UH School of Law. Today's show was produced by Susie Roth with technical assistance from Jeff Ailardy. I hope you'll tune in next week when guest host Peter Adler, a non-lawyer, and his guests will answer the question, are lawyers doing enough for the community? I promise this is going to be the last of our lawyer shows, but I think it's going to be a real interesting one. In fact, my hunch is that a lot of folks are going to have an opinion on whether or not lawyers are doing enough for the community. As usual, the goal will be lively and informed dialogue. You've been listening to the Price to Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.