The Impact of Diversity and Inclusion in Law School
Law School Scholarship Policies: Engines of Inequity
Document Type
Issue/Research Brief/Blog
Publication Date
2-2017
Keywords
student financial aid, law school diversity, merit-based financial aid, need-based financial aid, race and ethnicity
Abstract
The cost of legal education is a topic of considerable interest. Discussions tend to revolve around ever-rising tuition sticker prices. The truth, however, is that relatively few students actually pay sticker price for their legal education. The downturn in law school applications and enrollments has prompted schools to rely more heavily on tuition discounts – mainly, scholarships – as means of attracting students. Over 70% of the law students surveyed by LSSSE in 2016 reported having received scholarships for their studies – a proportion that would have been unimaginable a decade ago. By forcing schools to be more generous in awarding scholarships, the decreased demand for legal education has been a bright spot for many students.
The distribution of law school scholarships has vast implications on student debt trends. The more a student receives in scholarship aid, the less the student will likely have to rely on loans to fund their studies. Given this prominence, it is important that we understand more about the scholarships being awarded and more about the recipients.
For the first time, questions on the 2016 LSSSE Survey asked respondents to share information about scholarship and grant aid they may have received. The responses provided a wealth of insight about eligibility criteria and the students who received this aid. Core to our analyses was the role of equity in law school scholarship awarding. We wanted to understand the extent to which scholarships were being awarded to students with the most financial need.
Equity is important given the risks involved with attending law school. If scholarships are awarded to students with the most financial need, these students could attend law school with less financial stress and less reliance on student loans. The aid would, in turn, minimize risks among students for whom law school is already riskiest. Unfortunately, based on the LSSSE Survey data, law school scholarships flow most generously to students with the least financial need and least generously to those with the most need.
These trends exacerbate preexisting privilege and disadvantage, setting the stage for long-term disparities in experiences and outcomes. Moreover, the tuition-driven nature of legal education leads to a perverse “reverse Robin Hood” reality, in which the most disadvantaged students subsidize the attendance of their privileged peers. This is the hallmark of an inequitable system – one that is simply indefensible.
