NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Sun May 26, 2013 6:53 pm

Federal vs. state clerkships are a good start, but there are some state clerkships that are really good and some that are low level, provide minimal compensation, and are unlikely to lead to a good job. I bring this up because I've observed that state clerkships on the Colorado Supreme Court or the Colorado Court of Appeals are great outcomes from CU, probably the best outcomes here aside from the very few that get federal clerkships. I assume it's similar in most states. So why can't NALP just ask the schools to breakdown their clerkship placement?

Such info could be very helpful. For example, Seton Hall churns out tons of clerks (35% of the class) and claims that 94% of them had full-time long term employment after their clerkships. ( Actually, they claim that 94% of those who clerked for over a year found such employment, without providing what percent of their clerkships lasted one year or more. ) Based on my experience in Colorado, where 70% of our clerks are either federal or state appellate, I am impressed with Seton Hall's clerkship score. If NALP would ask Seton Hall what percent of its clerks were in the New Jersey Supreme Court and what percent where in in six month stints in traffic court the data would be so much better.

Some links..

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/c ... clerkships

http://law.shu.edu/ProspectiveStudents/ ... /index.cfm

http://www.colorado.edu/law/2013/05/17/ ... ols-report

User avatar
Richie Tenenbaum
Posts: 2162
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby Richie Tenenbaum » Sun May 26, 2013 7:05 pm

IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby rad lulz » Sun May 26, 2013 7:14 pm

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)

Also needs an "other federal" category

Lord Randolph McDuff
Posts: 1587
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Sun May 26, 2013 7:18 pm

rad lulz wrote:
Richie Tenenbaum wrote:IMO, the best way to break it down is federal appellate, federal district, state supreme court, and other state clerkships. But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)

Also needs an "other federal" category


If we are are adding categories we might as well add one more. Including "State Appellate" would really illuminate the data from schools like Seton Hall.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:But there really is no perfect way to breakdown this information. (Example: For someone working in Texas, it's probably a better result to clerk for the TX Supreme Court then it would be to clerk for a random district court judge in a flyover state.)


I agree completely. It's hard to make apples to apples comparisons across different law schools in different regions of the country. But the more information the better, ya know.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby timbs4339 » Mon May 27, 2013 1:34 am

If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby rad lulz » Mon May 27, 2013 1:39 am

timbs4339 wrote:If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx

Needs ft/lt/bpr

User avatar
Monochromatic Oeuvre
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby Monochromatic Oeuvre » Mon May 27, 2013 6:57 am

timbs4339 wrote:If they're collecting it, no reason to break it down. What Michigan did is just awesome.

http://www.law.umich.edu/careers/classs ... stats.aspx


Really want to meet the graduate who took their T10 law degree and went to be a sheep farmer.

philepistemer
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:43 am

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby philepistemer » Mon May 27, 2013 11:39 am

Sheep farming with a law degree from michigan isn't that crazy. Big ag is more lucrative than big law, and a law degree may help that guy lobby for subsidies.

PRgradBYU
Posts: 1419
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:04 pm

Re: NALP should further differentiate between clerkship types

Postby PRgradBYU » Tue May 28, 2013 3:13 pm

philepistemer wrote:Sheep farming with a law degree from michigan isn't that crazy. Big ag is more lucrative than big law, and a law degree may help that guy lobby for subsidies.


LOL @ the term "BigAg."




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests