jims-blog.com

Check Out This Drivel

November 27, 2009 10:39AM

A writer for the National Jurist has responded to the now rampant allegations that law schools are publishing fraudulent salary statistics (hat tip ETLSS). The article, entitled You chose law school for a reason, was written by a lawyer who graduated at the top of her class (of course).

Of note, the author states:

I know of no "conspiracy" by law schools to inflate employment statistics...

Ah yes, a conspiracy! We're conspiracy theorists! Nobody is alleging that the law school deans gather at an annual meeting and conspire to publish fraudulent statistics all the while cackling like supervillains in a comic book. Rather, they independently inflate the stats because (A) there is ample motivation to do so and (B) there is ZERO accountability.

That the law school salary statistics are at least misleading should be considered a foregone conclusion by now given the overabundance of evidence. The author herself seems to implicitly acknowledge this:

Look carefully at employment statistics and don’t just accept numbers for face value.

And this is what the author suggests that prospective law students do instead:

Try to find answers to the following questions:

• Of the percentage of graduates reported to be employed, what percentage of graduates was employed immediately after graduation? What percentage was employed within nine months of graduation?
• More importantly, of those percentages, what percentage of graduates was employed in full-time positions? What percentage was employed in part-time positions? What percentage of grads held a permanent job, and what percentage entered temporary or contract-based employment?
• Just as importantly, what percentage of those graduates is practicing law? What percentage is employed in the legal field? What percentage is working in non-legal positions? What are those jobs? (As the Indiana University professor puts it, you need to know what percent of grads in “business” means driving a cab or waiting tables.) And, if applicable, what percentage returned to previous jobs or career fields after graduation?

First of all, good luck getting this information from any law school. The law schools don't publish these kinds of statistics because if they did, no one would go. Secondly, why not simply require the law schools to publish this information? Why would you foist this burden upon the prospective student? Is it so much to ask for law schools not to engage in deception? Should we really expect prospective law students to perform this kind of research? The law schools have the upper hand here - they are in the best position to provide accurate information.

The author, of course, engages in the usual pro-law school rhetoric and chides those of us who 'went to law school for the wrong reasons', such as to make money (god forbid):

DON’T go to law school, for example, because you’re lured by the prospect of making money: Most law grads will not get the six-figure salaries so often touted.

That 'most law grads' will not make six figure salaries is putting it a bit lightly. Most law grads will struggle for years under crushing debt, postponing (perhaps indefinitely) getting married, buying a home, and having children.

DON’T go because you’re trying to please someone else who thinks law school is the right path for you. Only you should make that decision.

DON’T go because you think law school will serve as a “default” option. With a grueling workload and rising tuition costs, you need to make sure you’re enrolled because you want to be, and because the law degree makes sense as a lucrative option for your future.

So, you say we should not have enrolled to make money, yet we should have enrolled because the law degree makes sense as a lucrative option for your future. Basically what you're saying is that it's ok to go to law school to make money if you are correct in your assessment that you will, in fact, make money.

Here's an idea to make sure EVERY law grad can make money: revoke accreditation for at least 100 law schools and limit class sizes so that the number of graduates more closely corresponds to the number of available jobs for lawyers. It is needless and wasteful to have so many young people go through law school and pass the bar only to find that they will never be able to practice law. This mass dumping of hapless lawyers into the career incinerator serves only to fatten the pockets of law school professors and administrators - there is no other reason for it.

Many of the unemployed law grads you no doubt regard as misguided failures actually went to law school not for riches but because they wanted to practice law. Many of them likely would have made excellent lawyers. Likewise, many of those who have succeeded in the field went only for the money (I know a few); many of them have contempt for the work and are perhaps not the best lawyers. Many succeed only due to salesmanship and/or family connections. Life is not a meritocracy - the legal field especially is not a meritocracy. We all owe a great deal of our fortune (or lack thereof) to chance.

The author concludes with this insightful tidbit:

But grumbling about conspiracies won’t help you, and neither will burying your head in the sand. Instead, you need to consider – realistically – all of the opportunities and options that await you and make informed decisions about your career choices.

To this I can only say that it is you who are burying your head in the sand if you think that the thundering chorus of anti-law school articles in blogs and the mainstream media is the result of anything other than an insane oversupply of lawyers and the deceptive practices of law schools.

38MD6KU6R8X4