So much for slow news days on summer Fridays. As you probably heard, this past week during an education forum in upstate New York, President Barack Obama addressed a question that many pre-law students, law school students and members of the legal education community have also been wondering about: how can we make law school more affordable? The president, a Harvard Law School graduate and former law school professor didn’t mince his words. In fact, it’s amazing how “unlawerly” this answer was.:
“This is probably controversial to say, but what the heck, I’m in my second term. Law schools would probably be wise to think about being two years instead of three years. In the first two years, young people are learning in the classroom. The third year, they’d be better off clerking or practicing in a firm, even if they weren’t getting paid that much. But that step alone would reduce the cost for the student. Now, the question is, ‘Can law schools maintain quality and keep good professors and sustain themselves without that third year?’ My suspicion is, is that if they thought creatively about it, they probably could.”
Will the President’s opinion alone spur further reform among today’s ABA-approved law schools? Probably not, but it does raise additional awareness among the public about it and it may increase pressure on law schools to institute further measures – whether that means actually shaving a year off or cutting tuition. As you know, some law schools are already ahead of the curve or trying to get there.
Transforming law schools into two year programs would be highly controversial and disruptive as it may affect law schools’ own finances and law school professors’ careers, but some law school faculty would welcome the change.
What does this mean for your students in the immediate future? It means that they should remain aware about the benefits of a law degree, but also the costs. Let’s face it. You cannot think about going to law school these days without thinking about how to pay for it. This is something that we know you have been telling your students and also something that we here at Kaplan have consistently spoken to our students about. It’s not just about getting into law school – it’s about getting into a law school that will prepare them for a career and give them good career options. As fulfilling as the law school experience and holding a JD can be, there’s no caché in being mired in $40,000 in debt and the inability to land a job in the legal field that gives you economic security. So how can students reduce the costs of law school right now? It can start with the LSAT – scoring well on it can lead to merit-based financial aid in the form of grants. Grants, unlike loans, don’t have to be paid back. Bigger picture, it’s about putting together the strongest application possible, but given the importance admissions officers place on an applicant’s LSAT score, start there.
As we’ve discussed before in this blog, these are unprecedented times of change in legal education. We’ll continue to monitor this issue as things develop – in fact, you can expect some Kaplan Test Prep proprietary data on this very topic when we release results from our 2013 survey of law school admissions officers this fall. Stay tuned as this will certainly help foster the dialogue. What is your opinion? Do you think law schools should become two years instead of three years? Sound off below.
