Research Blog 9

When discussing the crisis in legal education, much is agreed on. Throughout all of my research, I have yet to come across a source denying the fact that law schools are in a downward spiral. The simple fact of the matter is numbers do not lie. All across the board, law schools are losing money. Each year more and more students choose to avoid pursuing a legal education in favor of other career opportunities. Yet the students and institutions are not the only ones suffering. Many major legal firms have minimized staff, been subject to massive buy outs and even dissolved completely since the economic downturn of 2009. With seemingly no end in sight, it stands to reason that this crisis is only the beginning of a much larger problem in higher education. Some have even gone so far as to say that law schools are the “bleeding edge” of the higher education bubble. What is most astonishing, is that there is almost a total consensus amongst those in the legal profession that this crisis is very much a real issue. Very few have been bold enough to speak up in disagreement, and those that do, have only done so in brief interviews. That being said, one cannot expect a bunch of lawyers, writing on a very personal subject to agree completely. Arguments arise mainly around the discussion of how this crisis came to rise. Even in this discussion there is much agreement. In my research I have found that each argument presents valid points and I have used almost all of these arguments in my paper. Of these arguments, two can be debated more so than the rest. The idea of greed comes up in almost every piece written on this topic. First many are quick to point out the greed of the institutions. This greed can be observed in the past 30 years of tuition increases that have far outweighed average income growth. Few articles mention another greed that existed over time, the greed of the students. So many students went to law school only to make large amounts of money. Six figure starting salaries were expected by almost all graduates. The argument made against school is naturally a stronger one as it can be backed up by indisputable data. While the argument against student greed is more qualitative. Although it may not be readily defended with specific numbers, there is little doubt in my mind that students own greed did not play a role in the events that have unfolded. Entering a job market with such high expectations certainly damaged the market. This can be observed now in the astonishingly low starting salaries that many new lawyers are obtaining. In my research I found that only about 30 percent of new lawyers are making over 60,000 dollars annually. With a smaller market lawyers are now forced to accept jobs that many of the predecessors would have considered to be below them. Contrasting the greed of students with that of the institutions is one of the few debates in this crisis. However it still stands to be agreeable amongst most. Perhaps this speaks to the severity of the situation.