A group of fresh, unemployed lawyers have banded together to sue law schools. 73 alumni have filed at least fifteen class-action lawsuits, alleging the schools inflated employment figures and salary data to attract students and increase rankings. The real goal of the lawsuits seems to be to effect systemic change in the education industry and associations that accredit law schools, like the American Bar Association.
Schools are in the business of generating alumni, and to a great extent, use as many marketing tricks that any company uses in order to influence public opinion. It’s true that a 90% graduate employment rate looks better than a 75% rate on paper, and I’d be more inclined to choose a school with a higher employment rate, with all other factors being equal. But a 90% graduate employment rate doesn’t guarantee that I would receive the job I want after graduation, even if I were in the top 10% of the class.
Furthermore, I’ve come to the conclusion over the years that any statistic used for marketing purposes is subject to manipulation in an attempt to further the goals of marketing. Hard numbers give the impression of fact. From an early age, we’re trained to believe that one plus one equals two, in all circumstances, and numbers are truth. Statistics can be misleading in many ways, and are used more often to try to convince others of a point of view rather than quantify facts in reality.
The group of lawyers probably can’t prove that the blame for their unemployment situation rests with the law schools. There are many factors that contribute to unemployment, including the overall economy, local job markets, and the effort, skills, and self-marketability of each alumnus. It doesn’t appear as if the former students are suing to have the schools compensate them for the lack of expected income from working, but they are suing to enlighten the public to the issue of misleading statistics throughout the educational industry.
Mutual funds must advertise that “past performance does not guarantee future results.” Even if a graduate employment rate were perfectly measured and accurately reflected exactly what a potential student understood the number to be, a good rate today is no indication that the rate will continue to be high by the time the school awards a degree or certification. If my index mutual fund returned 12% last year and lost 8% this year, I can’t sue the fund manager or the stock market for not providing the dividends I was hoping for. If fraud was involved, it might be a different situation. Perhaps misleading statistics like graduate employment rates are somewhat fraudulent, but I don’t see a parallel as schools do not typically promise that students will be employed at the level they’d like after graduation — and in the case of lawyers, after passing the bar exam.
There might be better ways of raising the issue of misleading statistics in the marketing endeavors in which institutes of education engage. Using the courts to make a point is only one tool that’s available to increase awareness of an issue. When you’re a hammer, though, everything looks like a nail.
Several years ago, while I was completing my Masters in Business Administration degree, I considered attending law school. Ultimately, I decided not to pursue a law degree and to focus my energy on my business instead. I think I made the right decision.
Photo: CubanRefugee
WNYC
{ 15 comments }
As technology advances, it brings manufacturers and customers closer together, often eliminating the need for companies that stand in between, adding to the cost of products and services. In some ways, the financial industry is a “middle man.” Banks take deposits in the form of savings and checking accounts, and turn that money around and lend it to individuals and businesses in need of capital. Peer-to-peer lending companies like 
There’s a need for consumers to better manage their own personal finances. Over the last decade, this has been the realm of software like Quicken and Microsoft Money, but the latter has disappeared from the market and the former is increasingly seen as an outdated piece of software. In recent years, a number of companies had been developing personal finance management software for a new generation, incorporating mobile options and focusing on reporting and trending rather than reconciliation, though the depth offered could not compete with Quicken. Many of these companies have disappeared, and the apparent winner, 
Merchant account service is a big business rules by large companies. Each time you 
The buzz today is about Facebook’s imminent initial public offering (IPO) of stock. Soon, Facebook will be a public company, and investors will be able to trade shares of the company in a liquid stock exchange. For most people, this will be the first opportunity to invest in Facebook, a company that has grown significantly over the last few years. Of course, those who own part of the company already, like early and current employees, will see the biggest benefit after an IPO, assuming the company continues to grow.
With technology changing quickly, smaller companies are able to jump on new technology. Google is not exactly a smaller company, but the company’s development operations function like a start-up. Google also has the size to buy smaller companies with innovative ideas early in their development. Google Wallet, however, was developed in-house. New technology in mobile phones makes it easier to transmit information securely in close range, and retailers are using that technology to accept payments without swiping a card. An application stores credit card information, and when a receiving device is in range and the consumer initiates the transaction, his or her device sends the information securely to the retailers.
If you compare a short-term payday loan with a loan from a bank, you might see that the payday loan’s equivalent interest rate (APR) is 450% or even higher. Mortgages tend to be 3% to 7%, business and personal loans could be 5% to 10%, and credit cards are 10% to 20% unless you default. Anything higher, and the loan might be considered usurious. So how do payday lenders get away with charging 450% or more? 
