Law school tuition continues to rise into the stratosphere.
Though not new or surprising, considering lowered employment rates and the controversy surrounding law school employment data, the continued rise in tuition begs just a few, friendly questions.
- When students no longer can count on high paying jobs after graduation, how can law schools justify raising tuition at the same rate or even at all?
- As future applicants consider law school as an option and weigh the risk of being unemployed with the certainty of diving head first into debt, which applicants will be deterred and how will this change the socio-economic population of the legal landscape?
- Where is the pressure coming from for law schools to fudge data and who should hold them accountable?
- Do the US News & World Report Rankings create an incentive to hike up tuition?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the US News and Rankings clearly factors in the “expenditures per student” yet somehow does not list the “affordability of tuition” of the law school as a factor to incorporate into their weighted, highly empirical average for their rankings. Law schools seem to have been hit hard by this whole economic downturn thing, yet they seem to be scrambling to adjust to better fit the needs of students. What might continue to attract students to their doors? High employment rates of course. It’s not like statistics are hard to manipulate or anything, even in a legit way. Sure bet that poor kid really wants to enroll in law school knowing he will likely die before paying off his debts. Even those helpful post-grad jobs allowing for loan forgiveness seem to be falling out of the sky and into the laps of any 3L in need. A high paying Ferrari job, you say? But of course.
However, just maybe, let’s not put the cart before the . . . Whoa horsey. Let’s just not go there.
And so dear law schools, why again does tuition keep rising? It’s clearly to benefit students, right?