My last post touched a nerve or two - writing about entitled law students who blame their law school for their woes. It's tough for a law student to admit that attending law school was solely for the cash at the end of the tunnel, and it's harder to admit that attendance was based on a sales pitch.
Hence, this comment:
What the scamblogs criticize the law schools for is falsifying employment data to fraudulently show that if you graduate from law school you are more likely than not to get a secure job for reasonable pay. If the Career Services Office publishes figures showing that 95% of their graduates were employed after graduation in order to convince people to pay tuition to go to their school, when they know that number is false, that is fraud. Why are you defending fraud?
If the Career Services Office publishes figures showing that 95% of their graduates were employed after graduation in order to convince people to pay tuition to go to their school, when they know that number is false, that is fraud.
Quite possibly, yes. It is fraud. But you, the law school applicant, are a fraud as well. You, the future lawyer that considers this statistic in determining whether to attend not only a certain law school, but law school at all.
The comment here, answers the question in the affirmative - that yes, there is a line of law school applicants that are hooked by the notion of almost guaranteed job offers upon displaying your degree. Today's law student (no, not all of them) wants to blame the law school for "roping" them in to 3 years of busting their ass. Three years of hard work with a false guarantee of a job.
What should really occur is a question on the law school application that says:
"Are you stupid enough to invest 3 years of your life in this school based on our sales pitch that you'll get a job? If 'yes,' please stop filling out this application and discard."
Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.
3 comments:
I've posted a more lengthy response to this post on my blog, but here's an excerpt:
What made any one expect that the "busting their [butt]" phase of their lives would end after law school? If you don't like where you ended up after graduation (in a down economy and with ever-increasing numbers of law grads), got off your couch and do something about it. Start your own practice (it doesn't have to cost a lot, done right). Get on the court appointment lists. Find a mentor. Take free CLEs (they're everywhere) and use them to network. You have yourself to blame, not the law schools.
Someone suited to the practice of law would query what 95% employment really means, because good lawyers ask questions. First, the word employment can mean anything from clerking for the US Supreme Court to part time cab driving. Besides, no law school is saying "95% employment at a salary sufficient to maintain a comfortable lifestyle and payoff student loans in under 15 years."
Using logic - a favorite tool of lawyers - there is no way to rationally draw the conclusion that an employment statistic is a guarantee of employment. Indeed, basic research would tell you that, even in a good economy, not all law graduates are employed after graduation or make enough to support their debt load. The Bureau of Labor Statistics provides information on salaries by profession and region, as well as job growth in an industry. If you compare the BLS statistics to the number of first time takers that pass the bar each year, the conclusion is that less than 95% of all law grads work as lawyers and that many do not make enough to service $100K plus of student debt.
From The New York Times:
Is Law School a Losing Game?
Law schools’ rosy statistics say most graduates are working. The problem is, many aren’t working as lawyers, or making enough to pay back their student loans.
http://nyti.ms/i7g2mn
Post a Comment