Law students question value of their degree

A growing number of law students are concerned their law degree is a revenue-raising exercise for the universities, a leading student body has claimed.

Stefanie Garber • 04 August 2015 • NewLaw

Law students question value of their degree

Marie Iskander, vice-president of the Australian Law Students’ Association (ALSA), suggested students feel their degrees are now less valuable, despite costing more.

You’re out of free articles for this month

Username or Email

Password Forgot password?

Keep me signed in on this device.

First Name

Last Name

Mobile

Organisation Type

By becoming a member, I agree to receive information and promotional messages from Lawyers Weekly. I can opt out of these communications at any time. For more information, please visit our Privacy Statement.

Need help signing up? Visit the Help Centre.

“Students are concerned about the quality of the law degree and whether it is a degree which has value for money or whether it is being used as simply raising revenue for the university, while the revenue is being invested into other areas such as science and medicine,” Ms Iskander said.

“These concerns are heightened with some students indicating that their universities have introduced online law degrees, which will be relatively inexpensive to facilitate and will bring in a significant amount of revenue for the university.”

Graduates are facing a highly competitive job market, she said, a situation set to worsen as law schools increase their intake.

“ALSA are of the position that there is still an oversupply of graduates because of the increasing sizes of law schools and the duplication in the number of law schools across the country, as well as the tightening job market which is a result of a myriad of factors such as funding cuts to the public sector, a reduction in the number of grads that law firms are taking and so forth,” she said.

VIEW ALL

“Many who have undertaken the Juris Doctor particularly expressed concerns in their survey responses, highlighting that they undertook the postgraduate law degree to further their job prospects. Instead, they are facing the worrying reality that there are fewer jobs available for law graduates as well as the fact that they are completing their degrees with a sizeable student debt.”

ALSA is currently seeking submissions to its national advocacy survey, which will examine law student attitudes towards their degree and the legal profession.

Initial survey results reflect the concerns raised by Ms Iskander, with almost 90 per cent of respondents so far indicating they believe there is an oversupply of graduates.

One student reported their fear that “too many law students [graduating] devalues my degree”.

Another indicated that the tight job market “added exponentially to the amount of stress I feel”.

“It greatly affects my work/life/study balance. Ironically, this also impacts on my grades,” the student wrote.

To address the over-supply of graduates, ALSA is campaigning in the universities to provide students with more information about their job prospects, including offering alternatives to the big firms.

The organisation is pressuring the government to increase public sector funding, as well as to provide incentives to lawyers to head to rural or regional areas.

“ALSA is of the strong belief that the funding crisis affecting the public sector and community legal sector is having an adverse impact on our law graduates as well as the broader community who are desperately in need of legal advice, assistance and representation,” Ms Iskander said.

Other issues raised by students include proposed higher education reforms and current fee structures, including the cap on Fee-Help precluding JD students from accessing funding for practical legal training.

The pressure to take on internships and unpaid work was also flagged by a number of students.

Absurdiness Brown Monday, 25 April 2016

Difficult. The market is incredibly harsh.I see CVs from some amazing candidates, who 15 years ago would have been considering a dozen offers.Stick at it. It beats giving up.

0
Jack Wednesday, 30 March 2016

Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius does not apply to my earlier comment - if it makes you feel in better company, you may consider the wrist-slapping to extend to your interlocutors ;)I'm not sure you've satisfied me that innovation is able to deliver significantly more jobs for lawyers, or that it is even desirable to do so (from a public interest perspective).Innovation in this sector seems limited to not-quite-zero-sum changes in amount of jobs. For example, for every New Law gig, there's likely to be one less Old Law gig - for a net 0 new jobs. Convince me how (very generally of course, no thesis required) innovation can deliver the requisite exponential proliferation of legal jobs to accommodate the equally increasing number of lawyers?Regarding the 1970s and All That, I had hoped I'd pre-empted that criticism by sketching out the regulatory state case for market intervention: the circumstances constitute market failure by informational disparity, thereby warranting regulation (in some form, for some amount of time - the usual qualifications). Such an approach to market intervention is, pardon my back-patting, quite the de jour, Cass Sunstein-approved method.

0
Jeremy Holt Wednesday, 30 March 2016

So good points there. Are you attempting to moderate other personalities on this site, also?I think you are underestimating the ability of people to innovate.The system is forever in flux - the only true constant is oneself.Lawyers need to adjust and change just like every other industry else they face obliteration.My point, if you read beyond my jibes, is that you can approach it in two ways, the change that always, is, being a victim, or not.What your suggesting feels more like a return to the 1970's.That ain't happening ..

0
Jack Tuesday, 29 March 2016

Hi Jeremy, your comments have tended to inappropriately personalise what should be a discussion about structural trends and policy-making with regards to the tertiary education of lawyers, their vocational training, and the respective labour market/s. Regarding your observations, there is no real dispute as to whether, compared against a less-enterprising colleague, a hard-working lawyer is more likely to be offered roles within the market. Such lawyers might even create new roles for themselves. However, excepting some unforseen exponential growth in demand for lawyers (which is both unrealistic and, from a public interest perspective, surely undesirable) there is a low ceiling regarding innovation's capacity to increase labour market demand. The real issue appears to be that there is a failure to manage labour market supply/demand. Uncapped entrance into legal education and the profession, and an uninformed labour pool (aspirational students who are sold a lemon) leads to unemployed lawyers - on a structural level, personal work ethic cannot trump the numbers. If "labour market management", with the accompanying notion of, for example, bringing in a shiny new Ombudsman to cap law courses and admission of lawyers, all sounds a bit Trot for your liking, the regulatory state case (for market intervention due to market failure) emerges from the informational disparity affecting young entrants into the labour market. Young people, often underage or just turned 18, misunderstand that there are not, in fact, good job prospects as a lawyer - and this misunderstanding is not currently being redressed by any of the self-interested actors (to the contrary, every tertiary institute and its dog is opening up a law school, spruiking law degrees as the ticket to prestige and job security). So, the case for market intervention (an education campaign, say), appears to be made out. The profession, the public, and vulnerable young workers would be well-served by either directly capping entry into the labour market, or promoting an informed cohort of young people, who may, once they see the numbers, perhaps make an informed decision as to whether or not they will have a punt at getting a legal gig. Finally, I appreciate that there is a labour market 'pressure release' of legal graduates transitioning into other roles and professions. This is fine, to an extent. However, if a substantial number of law graduates do not enter the profession, given the substantive law that must be taught, it is very inefficient to educate someone in tort/crim/admin law if that degree will simply be used as a generalist humanities/critical thinking tool - I am overcome by visions of sledgehammers cracking walnuts.

0
Jeremy Holt Tuesday, 29 March 2016

Hey there Valakos - there are two types of people in the world, those that are original thinkers, coming up with all the ideas, the rest can just recite quotes like a robot. They don't actually understand - as they are 'followers' - I'm guessing you'll have another quote already primed and prepared.. Like I've been saying to some of the people here - thanks, this is going to great 'cashing up'

0
F3 Wednesday, 16 March 2016

Could not agree more. Having worked in the profession for over 10 years at top firms and in-house, the grads from the best unis with high ATARS are the most entitled with weakest work ethics. Most grads start with a working basic knowledge of the law, but what sets apart good from great is attitude and respect for the law and clients/employer. From my experience, many grads from the best unis lack this, and often don't last the distance, wasting precious opportunities that would be relished by less "paper clever" grads. Early practice, including good mentoring, make more difference to the finished product than university training. The 10,000 hours theory stacks up in this regard. 

0
valakos Tuesday, 15 March 2016

any empirical research to back up your generalities?

0
valakos Tuesday, 15 March 2016

I am in a similar position, did a combined law/business degree at UTS - after year 2 I applied for over 200 jobs some in finance, some in law and some just general financial administration positions at banks/financial institutions and was rejected for each one. I then thought if i worked harder they might consider me so worked harder at uni and achieved a distinction average in law and high distinction average in finance (92), even achieved placings in many subjects as 3rd/4th etc but no firsts. applied again for many jobs (from big 4 accounting firms to law firms to smaller boutique firms etc) and was rejected over and over. I turned to places for resume help and all said it was great, done some volunteer work as well at the uni and tried everything even door knocking from small to large firms. Felt like absolute crap after finishing, my study time was worthless. I should have done computing science, unfortunately I do not have connections or networks - i would do anything just to get some experience. I have no idea what employers want, getting high grades means nothing

0
Jeremy Holt Thursday, 18 February 2016

The problem with YOU, is that you blame everyone else around you - rather than getting out there and making it happen you spend your time finding ways to justify how unsuccessful you are, and how much money you have wasted. You need to slap yourself in the face with a 'Wet Kipper' in front of a full length mirror - Nobody is going to do anything for you. YOU need to get off you lazy ass and go out there and make it happen. Questions? mmkkakyy All of your friends you have around you will probably tell you - your right, yes, ohh dear .. its tuff - guess what, it ain't going to get any easier. Like I said - you'll be vapor trail as I blaze a path. mmkkakyy

0
caring Tuesday, 16 February 2016

Lol. Typical lemming. Do please keep us updated of your wonderful legal 'career' ; you'll quickly discover that nobody cares about your 'hard work' etc etc. Your law dean is happy though, while he/she counts the student loan cash.

0