Department of Education Increases Transparency in Graduate School Outcomes

Prospective graduate students are about to gain access to a lot more financial outcomes data, which they can use to compare programs. Last week the U.S. Department of Education (DoE) announced that it finalized the Financial Value Transparency framework to consolidate financial outcomes data.  

All qualifying graduate programs will be required to submit data to the DoE on program cost, debt, sources of financial aid, and graduates’ earnings starting next July. As applicable, the data compilation will also include licensing outcomes for graduates. For example, law schools will provide data on graduates’ admission to the bar. The data will be consolidated, published, maintained, and made available to the public on a DoE website. As of 2026, the regulations will also stipulate that programs that do not meet an established debt-to-earnings ratio will be subject to a disclosure requirement. For these programs, all prospective students must acknowledge that they have reviewed the data and understand the financial risk, prior to matriculating in the program. 

For medical schools, the DoE’s final regulations acknowledge the lengthy nature of medical training in the U.S. where medical school graduates continue in lower-paying residency training programs post-graduation. To accommodate this practice, the DoE extended the horizon for collecting earnings data for medical schools to six years post-graduation. 

For business, law, and other graduate programs, the data provided to the DoE will use graduates’ earnings three years post-graduation. 

Dream About Working in Finance on Wall Street? You Might Consider Law School.

Wall Street may be home to bankers, but it's the lawyers who have seen the biggest compensation growth over the last two decades. A recent Wall Street Journal article analyzed pay patterns for bankers and financial lawyers, and while bankers have historically made significantly more than lawyers, the data shows a reversal in this trend. 

Since the financial crisis in 2008, bankers’ pay has remained fairly stagnant among all but the highest performers. Managing Directors at banks, who do not hold company leadership positions, average between $1 and $2 million in annual compensation including their bonuses, which are typically paid in stock. This average has held steady for about 20 years, without adjusting for inflation. 

The opposite is true among lawyers. Equity partners at top law firms are earning about $3 million annually. This is about three times higher than the reported earnings 20 years ago. And, among the most productive partners, the upside is even higher. Partners at some firms, including at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Kirkland & Ellis, are earning more than $15 million per year. Mark Rosen, an experienced legal recruiter, described his observations to the WSJ. “Things have changed. Lawyer compensation has grown unbelievably,” he said. 

According to the WSJ the reasons for this change are multi-faceted. There are regulatory pressures at financial institutions as well as an industry trend of downplaying individuals in favor of the bank’s brand name. The private equity market has also grown, expanding the client base for law firms and growing their business. 

The role of a lawyer on Wall Street has also changed. Once relegated to contract review, the lawyers now look more like “quasibankers,” taking on outsized advisory roles with clients. They now partner with banks on everything from regulatory matters to succession planning. 

Within the law firm, there have also been shifts. Firms have adjusted compensation models to reward productivity over seniority. The new productivity-based view on compensation has even resulted in “bidding wars” for talented lawyers, further driving up compensation. 

Lastly, while banking fees have remained relatively consistent over time, law firms raise their fees annually, and at a rate over inflation.