Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby dingbat » Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:22 am

NR3C1 wrote:
The overall full-time, long-term legal rate is 55.2%.

The overall underemployment rate is 26.4%.


These numbers are awful. Thinking of investing 3 years and 200K; think again? Going to and completing law school gives one a 50/50 chance of working as a lawyer.

The thing to be careful with here, is to not apply the overall statistics and say, shit, that's the state of the legal market?

There are schools that boast much better employment prospects (e.g. HYS) and there are schools that are much worse.
There are very few who would argue against paying $200k for HYS, while there are plenty of schools I wouldn't attend for free, even if they threw in a cost of living stipend.

While it's good to know the overall state of the legal market, in terms of whether it's a good idea to go or not, look to the individual schools and the actual cost (COA - Scholarships; factor in any stips)
Yes, if you are last in your class, you will end up unemployed at almost every school. On the flip side, if you're first in your class at most schools (there are exceptions), you should be able to land a decent job.
But, go in figuring you'll end up median and look at the most likely outcome. Then factor in the probability of ending up at up-side potential and down-side risk and look at where that would place you.
Then make up your mind if the school is a good idea.
LST is a great tool. So is the ABA data. today, there's no excuse for coming out crying that you shouldn't have gone to law school.

wurst
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 4:06 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby wurst » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:38 am

dingbat wrote:
NR3C1 wrote:
The overall full-time, long-term legal rate is 55.2%.

The overall underemployment rate is 26.4%.


These numbers are awful. Thinking of investing 3 years and 200K; think again? Going to and completing law school gives one a 50/50 chance of working as a lawyer.

The thing to be careful with here, is to not apply the overall statistics and say, shit, that's the state of the legal market?

There are schools that boast much better employment prospects (e.g. HYS) and there are schools that are much worse.
There are very few who would argue against paying $200k for HYS, while there are plenty of schools I wouldn't attend for free, even if they threw in a cost of living stipend.

While it's good to know the overall state of the legal market, in terms of whether it's a good idea to go or not, look to the individual schools and the actual cost (COA - Scholarships; factor in any stips)
Yes, if you are last in your class, you will end up unemployed at almost every school. On the flip side, if you're first in your class at most schools (there are exceptions), you should be able to land a decent job.
But, go in figuring you'll end up median and look at the most likely outcome. Then factor in the probability of ending up at up-side potential and down-side risk and look at where that would place you.
Then make up your mind if the school is a good idea.
LST is a great tool. So is the ABA data. today, there's no excuse for coming out crying that you shouldn't have gone to law school.


Please pardon my ignorance, but what is LST?

User avatar
TexasAggie13
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 4:42 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby TexasAggie13 » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:44 am

Stands for Law School Transparency. I think its a necessary tool for anyone considering law school.

http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby manofjustice » Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:21 pm

There is some cause for optimism: we have seen a sharp drop off in response to this legal market, much sharper than 1991. This is probably due to the internet and sites like lawschooltransparency.com . The sharper decline may bode well for a quicker recovery.

The legal market has crashed before. Arguably we are about as bad as 1991, according to major metrics. As I've said elsewhere, the supposed "structural" changes that underlie the market correction are only partially convincing. They convince me that doc review is going away, and that the T4 might be effectively erased, but that's about it. Who wanted these things anyway?

We need "structural" reform at the ABA so that we don't go through the same thing again once this bubble gets shaken out: no more schools, smaller graduating classes, and economically and morally rational tuition. It can't be left up to the "market." The "market" will probably cause the opposite result, as long as the economy flags. These restrictions have to come from the ABA.

A cultural correction is due as well: we need to reacquaint academia in general, especially the legal academia, with their higher purpose and duty. And that duty should be embraced as a professional obligation at the law schools.

mrjohnsterman
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:07 am

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby mrjohnsterman » Fri Jun 15, 2012 4:53 pm


User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Greenandgold » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:11 pm

mrjohnsterman wrote:ABA data is now up http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/home.aspx


Awesome. I'll get started on the chart like we have for last year.

User avatar
RedBirds2011
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby RedBirds2011 » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:23 pm

Greenandgold wrote:
mrjohnsterman wrote:ABA data is now up http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/home.aspx


Awesome. I'll get started on the chart like we have for last year.



TYIA

User avatar
jenesaislaw
Posts: 996
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby jenesaislaw » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:40 pm

Just made the 2011 clearinghouse public. Check it out. Still working out a few bugs, but the data match the ABA's. We'll be adding more data from school websites as soon as practicable. If anybody wants to volunteer to help us, we'd love the help.

User avatar
jenesaislaw
Posts: 996
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 6:35 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby jenesaislaw » Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:56 pm

As always, we're also open to suggestions.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Greenandgold » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:01 pm

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... FladDFPTFE

Here's the chart for the top 14. I'll work on getting more schools up later tonight and tomorrow but I figured y'all would be interested in this one the most so here ya go. I'm open to suggestions of there's any formatting issues or things that you want changed so just send me a pm.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Greenandgold » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:04 pm

I think the biggest surprise I see so far is Chicago's huge jump in P.I.

Anybody got any explanation for that?

Kurst
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:33 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Kurst » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:10 pm

Image

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby manofjustice » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:12 pm

Greenandgold wrote:I think the biggest surprise I see so far is Chicago's huge jump in P.I.

Anybody got any explanation for that?


Yep, here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=181415&start=175

It's the newest law school trick to inflate employment statistics: school-funded state and local "clerkships" and public interest internships.

User avatar
RedBirds2011
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby RedBirds2011 » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:17 pm

manofjustice wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:I think the biggest surprise I see so far is Chicago's huge jump in P.I.

Anybody got any explanation for that?


Yep, here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=181415&start=175

It's the newest law school trick to inflate employment statistics: school-funded state and local "clerkships" and public interest internships.



Um...I don't think state clerkships are school funded bro.

attractive_NUisance
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:53 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby attractive_NUisance » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:20 pm

Looks like Northwestern beat Chicago pretty handily in Firms 100-500+ combined with Federal Clerkships.

User avatar
Greenandgold
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:45 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Greenandgold » Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:21 pm

manofjustice wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:I think the biggest surprise I see so far is Chicago's huge jump in P.I.

Anybody got any explanation for that?


Yep, here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=181415&start=175

It's the newest law school trick to inflate employment statistics: school-funded state and local "clerkships" and public interest internships.


Thanks. That law school transparency data looks great jenesaislaw!

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby rickgrimes69 » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:47 pm

Anyone else noticing how hard Mich got hammered? They officially had the worst biglawl placement in the T14, even GULC performed higher.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby rayiner » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:50 pm

rickgrimes69 wrote:Anyone else noticing how hard Mich got hammered? They officially had the worst biglawl placement in the T14, even GULC performed higher.


It doesn't really make sense to look big law placement by itself. Nearly everyone who does a federal clerkship does a 2L SA, or at least had the option to do one. The statistics just show GULC is bad at placing clerks relative to Michigan.

User avatar
rickgrimes69
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:56 am

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby rickgrimes69 » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:57 pm

rayiner wrote:
rickgrimes69 wrote:Anyone else noticing how hard Mich got hammered? They officially had the worst biglawl placement in the T14, even GULC performed higher.


It doesn't really make sense to look big law placement by itself. Nearly everyone who does a federal clerkship does a 2L SA, or at least had the option to do one. The statistics just show GULC is bad at placing clerks relative to Michigan.


But even taking that into account, it still looks like Mich only outperformed GULC and was handily trounced in overall placement relative to the rest of the T14, minus Cornell

User avatar
KevinP
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:56 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby KevinP » Sat Jun 16, 2012 12:06 am

^
I think Michigan had a horrible year because Michigan's career services told a ton of people to bid Chicago, which in retrospect was a very bad call.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby rayiner » Sat Jun 16, 2012 1:44 am

KevinP wrote:^
I think Michigan had a horrible year because Michigan's career services told a ton of people to bid Chicago, which in retrospect was a very bad call.


I've heard that before, and I think it's deeper than that. Michigan's general placement model (place a few people at each firm in a wide array of markets), just doesn't work well in a recession. In a recession, firms retrench to their core recruiting schools. Historically, Michigan isn't a core recruiting school for anyone. A comparison with NU is illustrative. For C/O 2007, NU placed more than a quarter of their class into just five firms (Kirkland, Sidley, Latham, Mayer, Skadden): http://lawfirmaddict.blogspot.com. Michigan didn't place more than half a dozen associates into any single firm. Instead, they placed 1-4 associates in a wide range of firms, in a wide range of markets.

When the recession hit, a lot of those markets stopped hiring, and the firms that were hiring retrenched to the schools where they regularly got 5+ associates each year, at the expense of schools where they only picked up a couple of associates regularly.

User avatar
thelawyler
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby thelawyler » Sat Jun 16, 2012 3:37 pm

What really needs to be released and published are 2L SA stats the year they happen.

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby manofjustice » Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:13 pm

RedBirds2011 wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
Greenandgold wrote:I think the biggest surprise I see so far is Chicago's huge jump in P.I.

Anybody got any explanation for that?


Yep, here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=181415&start=175

It's the newest law school trick to inflate employment statistics: school-funded state and local "clerkships" and public interest internships.



Um...I don't think state clerkships are school funded bro.


Bro, in a rational world, they wouldn't be. But that's the only explanation of some schools' ABA form. Check GWs.

User avatar
Campagnolo
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:49 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby Campagnolo » Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:03 pm

rayiner wrote:
KevinP wrote:^
I think Michigan had a horrible year because Michigan's career services told a ton of people to bid Chicago, which in retrospect was a very bad call.


I've heard that before, and I think it's deeper than that. Michigan's general placement model (place a few people at each firm in a wide array of markets), just doesn't work well in a recession. In a recession, firms retrench to their core recruiting schools. Historically, Michigan isn't a core recruiting school for anyone. A comparison with NU is illustrative. For C/O 2007, NU placed more than a quarter of their class into just five firms (Kirkland, Sidley, Latham, Mayer, Skadden): http://lawfirmaddict.blogspot.com. Michigan didn't place more than half a dozen associates into any single firm. Instead, they placed 1-4 associates in a wide range of firms, in a wide range of markets.

When the recession hit, a lot of those markets stopped hiring, and the firms that were hiring retrenched to the schools where they regularly got 5+ associates each year, at the expense of schools where they only picked up a couple of associates regularly.


This is really smart. I like this. It sounds entirely likely.

bbalcrzy23
Posts: 142
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 6:57 pm

Re: Class of 2011 Employment Statistics

Postby bbalcrzy23 » Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:28 pm

rickgrimes69 wrote:
rayiner wrote:
rickgrimes69 wrote:Anyone else noticing how hard Mich got hammered? They officially had the worst biglawl placement in the T14, even GULC performed higher.


It doesn't really make sense to look big law placement by itself. Nearly everyone who does a federal clerkship does a 2L SA, or at least had the option to do one. The statistics just show GULC is bad at placing clerks relative to Michigan.


But even taking that into account, it still looks like Mich only outperformed GULC and was handily trounced in overall placement relative to the rest of the T14, minus Cornell


Is it possible to find out what percentage of students participate in OCI at a particular school?




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests