By Andy Howlett '10
Columnist

One issue that should concern all members of the Law School community—especially in this current economic climate—is the ever-increasing cost of attendance.

In 2007-08, the out-of-state tuition for a JD student was $38,500. In 2008-09 that number jumped to $41,800, an increase of $3,300. (In-state tuition likewise jumped from $33,500 to $36,800). To put things in perspective, PILA reported that its 1L grants—after taxes—were worth about $3500. That means that the first year students lucky enough to receive one of these grants found over 90% of its post-tax value eaten up by an increase in tuition for the following year.

If you think that sounds bad, consider what the tuition was for the 2003-04 academic year: $27,737 for out-of-state students and $22,384 for in-state students. In the last five years alone, we have seen a total increase in tuition of over 50%.

Of course, UVA is hardly anomalous in this respect. As the Law School became financially independent from the State, tuition rose steeply to match that of top private law schools. Nonetheless, tuition at law schools across the country has shot up markedly­—over 100% in the past ten years at many schools—and UVA has followed along with that trend.

There’s little that students, especially those who are already enrolled in school, can do about the tuition increases. After sinking a year (or two) and tens of thousands of dollars into school, it doesn’t make sense for most students to even consider quitting, tuition increases notwithstanding. Most just grind their teeth and prepare to take out more loans.

Still, successive tuition increases are bad for students. While the Law School pursues valuable academic resources and plies top candidates with generous scholarships to maintain its prestige vis-a-vis its peer schools and in the legal market as a whole, higher tuition costs in the end will be borne by almost all the current students. As they are forced to borrow more money to cover the costs, the effects could be even more significant than ever before because of the poor economy and legal job market.

Now, I understand that running the Law School costs money. The costs of education have risen rapidly in recent years, particularly in the area of faculty recruitment and retention. I also understand that at least of some of the increase is a result of inflation. But it also should be noted that the economic climate has shifted significantly in the past year. Along with being in the midst of one of the worst recessions in modern history, America is no longer facing steep inflation but rather the prospect of deflation. I don’t know or claim to know how this might affect the costs of running the Law School next year, but on its face it would seem to make another large increase in tuition less justifiable.

Along those lines, it is not my purpose in this column to tear apart the Law School’s budgets or even to argue that a total tuition freeze is feasible. Rather, I want the administration to at least consider it, or failing that, adopt an increase that is limited in its scope (perhaps tied to the overall rate of inflation).

In other words, I respectfully urge the Law School to attempt to do more with less (or, failing that, the same without too much more). Not only would this help current and entering students and be greatly appreciated by them, it could also be a potential boon to recruiting: If UVA were to keep its tuition in check at a time when other top law schools are not, many top applicants would have an even stronger opinion of the Law School and its administration as one that truly cares about its students. Keeping tuition in check would represent, at least in relative terms, a scholarship to every single student at the Law School.

Another possibility that would have benefits for students would be to use a multilayered system to protect current students from large increases and give prospective students more notice of what the tuition structure would be like for the next three years. Such a system is already used by Cornell Law School and others, and essentially involves higher tuition for first-year students and lower tuition for second-and third-year students. That way, even if tuition is increased across the board, a student moving from her first to second year, or second to third year, won’t end up paying much more than she did the previous year, or maybe even less, depending on how the system is set up.

Doubtless, the Law School is not immune from what’s going on in the economy right now. But, as this newspaper has pointed out, neither are its students. I believe that the Law School should strongly consider their position when deciding whether and how much to raise tuition for the 2009-10 academic year.

Email: ah8gu@virginia.edu