Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby Knock » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:39 pm

Good stuff, thanks for sharing.

User avatar
nOO law
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:31 am

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby nOO law » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:39 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
nOO law wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
powerlawyer06 wrote:The reason why I am underwhelmed by the article is because I feel like every TLS user has heard this one million times. We are all more informed than the average law school applicant. I feel like this is a dead horse we are beating.

Posting another "law schools lie" article on TLS is like going into a christian church and saying "Have you guys heard about this Jesus guy?"

No, actually it's not. That'd be like reading an article talking about some breakthrough in evolutionary biology and saying, "Ugh, evolution is so old news. This is like beating a dead horse!"

I'm probably one of the most pessimistic on TLS re: job prospects for law students, and these numbers even shock (and scare) me. I knew that high paying jobs are scarce. I've knew that legal employment is tough. But 50% of law school graduates or less getting real, full-time legal jobs? That's pretty crazy. Also, yes, the article's main conclusion (law schools number fudge) isn't new. But it does a better job of showing how than I've seen before, and it also does a really good job of breaking apart the most recent NALP data.

So while you're right that this is an old subject of conversation around here, it is a new perspective with some new numbers, so it is not at all beating a dead horse.



So tl;dr... Are you calling this article a breakthrough?


tl;dr -- no


:D

Just glancing over the numbers they don't seem as bad as I thought. 200 law schools and 45000 grads ~50-60% isn't a bad number. Also, aren't these percentages similar or even substantially better than other professional schools (not medical).

User avatar
ThomasMN
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby ThomasMN » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:40 pm

Also, I think there could be an argument made that no employment in big law is truly "permanent."

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby Knock » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:42 pm

ThomasMN wrote:Also, I think there could be an argument made that no employment in big law is truly "permanent."


That's not how they were using the word "permanent," as they explicitly said in the article.

User avatar
ThomasMN
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby ThomasMN » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:44 pm

I am a little curious how much of the unemployment and non-legal employment is brought about because the law school graduate failed the Bar exam.

User avatar
ThomasMN
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby ThomasMN » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:44 pm

Knock wrote:
ThomasMN wrote:Also, I think there could be an argument made that no employment in big law is truly "permanent."


That's not how they were using the word "permanent," as they explicitly said in the article.


I was trying to make a somewhat dry joke.

User avatar
Knock
Posts: 5152
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby Knock » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:44 pm

ThomasMN wrote:I am a little curious how much of the unemployment and non-legal employment is brought about because the law school graduate failed the Bar exam.


Probably none. If someone failed the bar exam, there are thousands of qualified graduates available to fill the job.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:46 pm

ThomasMN wrote:I am a little curious how much of the unemployment and non-legal employment is brought about because the law school graduate failed the Bar exam.


I think they get put in the "Unemployed, not seeking employment" category.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby DoubleChecks » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:48 pm

nOO law wrote::D

Just glancing over the numbers they don't seem as bad as I thought. 200 law schools and 45000 grads ~50-60% isn't a bad number. Also, aren't these percentages similar or even substantially better than other professional schools (not medical).


wait what? ~50-60% chance of not having a full time legal job after dumping 3 yrs and $150k-200k in tuitions is not a bad number? lol man vegas roulette for you son! i vote EVENS (30/70 split if you win it).

User avatar
ThomasMN
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 3:38 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby ThomasMN » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:53 pm

Knock wrote:
ThomasMN wrote:I am a little curious how much of the unemployment and non-legal employment is brought about because the law school graduate failed the Bar exam.


Probably none. If someone failed the bar exam, there are thousands of qualified graduates available to fill the job.


There is a big difference. If say, 20% of law school graduates across the board failed the bar exam that would set a base level of "non-legal" employment at 20%. Therefore, it would mean that the percentage of people we are really worried about, law school graduates who can practice law, who don't have legal employment is actually smaller than %50.

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby scammedhard » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:54 pm

Less than 50% chance of landing a legal job... This is beyond AWFUL. Where has the ABA been? They should get fired. They should lose the right to accredit law schools.

User avatar
Strange
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:23 am

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby Strange » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:56 pm

I'm well aware this isn't news especially to the regulars on this forum, so the sarcasm wasn't needed. It's a recent article about something that affects all of us with some new information. It came up on my blogroll so I thought I'd post it

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby scammedhard » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:58 pm

Strange wrote:I'm well aware this isn't news especially to the regulars on this forum, so the sarcasm wasn't needed. It's a recent article about something that affects all of us with some new information. It came up on my blogroll so I thought I'd post it

No. This is far, far worse than I expected. I thought I was being pessimistic, but now I realize that I was being too optimistic.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:01 pm

TBF, 2010 data is expected to be the worst data of all.

Also, what exactly do you propose the ABA does? If they just shut down schools and take away accreditation they run into anti-trust issues.

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby scammedhard » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:06 pm

aliarrow wrote:TBF, 2010 data is expected to be the worst data of all.

Also, what exactly do you propose the ABA does? If they just shut down schools and take away accreditation they run into anti-trust issues.

I don't see/hear the AMA, APA, ADA, or other prefessional organzitions running into anti-trust issues.
The ABA should FORCE schools to release accurate and honest employment data and have the data audited regulalry. They should also raise the bar passage standards and close down schools that have awful attrition rates, like Cooley, Jefferson, Barry, and half the other TTTs. I see no anti-trust issues there. Just preventing stupid people from being scammed.

User avatar
JusticeHarlan
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby JusticeHarlan » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:08 pm

powerlawyer06 wrote:The reason why I am underwhelmed by the article is because I feel like every TLS user has heard this one million times. We are all more informed than the average law school applicant. I feel like this is a dead horse we are beating.

Posting another "law schools lie" article on TLS is like going into a christian church and saying "Have you guys heard about this Jesus guy?"

This seems to assume that TLS users are a monolithic block, rather than a group whose membership fluctuates - new posters arrive here all the time. If we didn't post things like this article from time to time, people lurking on the site might not get the benefit of the knowledge that longer tenured users have about the situation and just assume law schools aren't juking the stats. I see it as a good thing that threads like this keep popping up, especially when there are new articles (rather than 9 threads about that one NYT article).

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:08 pm

scammedhard wrote:
aliarrow wrote:TBF, 2010 data is expected to be the worst data of all.

Also, what exactly do you propose the ABA does? If they just shut down schools and take away accreditation they run into anti-trust issues.

I don't see/hear the AMA, APA, ADA, or other prefessional organzitions running into anti-trust issues.
The ABA should FORCE schools to release accurate and honest employment data and have the data audited regulalry. They should also raise the bar passage standards and close down schools that have awful attrition rates, like Cooley, Jefferson, Barry, and half the other TTTs. I see no anti-trust issues there. Just preventing stupid people from being scammed.


You have to take into consideration that the ABA doesn't deal with reasonable benign organizations and people, they deal with lawyers.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:10 pm

JusticeHarlan wrote:
powerlawyer06 wrote:The reason why I am underwhelmed by the article is because I feel like every TLS user has heard this one million times. We are all more informed than the average law school applicant. I feel like this is a dead horse we are beating.

Posting another "law schools lie" article on TLS is like going into a christian church and saying "Have you guys heard about this Jesus guy?"

This seems to assume that TLS users are a monolithic block, rather than a group whose membership fluctuates - new posters arrive here all the time. If we didn't post things like this article from time to time, people lurking on the site might not get the benefit of the knowledge that longer tenured users have about the situation and just assume law schools aren't juking the stats. I see it as a good thing that threads like this keep popping up, especially when there are new articles (rather than 9 threads about that one NYT article).


I agree, it does just get somewhat annoying seeing the same things brought up as if its breaking news, but I completely see the need for it to be brought up again every couple weeks.

User avatar
CG614
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 10:26 am

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby CG614 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:10 pm

Capitol A wrote:I believe that this is important information, and that there are probably a lot of people that still think a law degree (ANY law degree) is a ticket to fame and fortune. Those people would definitely benefit from a wake up call before taking on hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt pursuing a path in which the odds are stacked against them ever securing gainful employment.
All this being said, I don't think I have a similar reaction to this type of info that most TLSers seem to. You see a lot of TLS posts that say things like: "If you attend school X you only have a 1 in 10 chance at BigLaw" as if there is some type of raffle at the school to determine who gets the 'good' jobs. It doesn't work like that. This same logic would have given the same advice to me and to George Clooney regarding pursuing careers in acting: "don't do it. You have a 1 in a million chance of actually making money." When the truth is that he is talented and good looking. I, on the other hand am just good looking-no talent. So we don't each have an equal shot as in the case of some type of lottery system.
My point is, if you are going to Cooley or to Phoenix SOL, you are making a terrible investment; but if you are going to Ohio State, or Alabama, or some other mid-range T50 where they are realistically putting 40% or so of their grads into full time legal employment, then it is at least in part up to you, and your talent and your work ethic to determine whether you are in the group that makes the school proud or you are in the group that they report as being employed even though you are walking behind the elephants at the local circus. No one is going to hand you anything on a silver platter or write you check just because you have a JD, but if you are willing to bust your butt to ensure you are a standout perfomer in class and in your internships/externships etc. Some people are getting good jobs, and you can be one of those people.

And the problem with your analysis is that it assumes that "busting your butt" can give you an advantage. Don't you think everyone is "busting their butt?" Since you can't reasonably predict grades/employment (outside of some other factors like work experience), it is reasonable to use the 1 in 10 (numbers depending on school) model for success.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4862
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby Borhas » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:13 pm

bk1 wrote:
aliarrow wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
bk1 wrote:I'm actually reading it because you said this. And I agree, it's pretty good.

The most shocking conclusion made in the article is that well less than 50% of law school graduates found full-time, permanent employment that requires a J.D. That is downright appalling.


Of one T50 school. I'm pretty confident its a not-so-great Cali school.

Not that I think this would be that much of a stretch for the other schools.


Why must CA be so bumfucked? And yeah it is probably either Davis or Hastings.




In order to calculate this figure, I used employment data drawn from 183 individual NALP forms, in which graduates of one top 50 school self-reported their employment status nine months after graduation.


Of the 191 students in the class, information was available on the employment status of 190 students. Of the 190 students, nine months after graduation, 183 students were employed; 5 students were enrolled in an advanced degree program; and 2 students were not seeking employment. Thus, this graduating class had a success rate of 99%, nine months after graduation.

http://www.law.ucdavis.edu/prospective/ ... stics.html

I think it actually is Davis... :lol: /jk... no idea what these NALP forms are... I wonder if public has access to them...

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby stratocophic » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:14 pm

ThomasMN wrote:Someone should hit up TNR for hardcore plagiarism. I swear I read an article with the same facts, though somewhat less vitriolic, months ago. It throws around a lot of anecdotal evidence to create a storm of "controversy." I have to agree with the posters above: just another person stirring the pot that going to a ttt law school, or even a "t50" school, is probably not a good idea if you it will leave you $100,000 - $250,000 in debt.

That being said, the job market BLOWS, PERIOD. I know this article is old: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/busin ... djobs.html . We are in a general crunch, and the sad reality is that most people who are entering the job market right now or who entered the job market over the last few years are in a generally bad spot. Some majors are certainly better off than others. I know that Gallup has the U.S. underemployment rate at somewhere around %20. That does not mean don't be a lawyer, it means make a smart, educated choice when it comes to attending law school. I think a lot of TLS posters do exactly that.
*Is TLS poster*
*Attends GULC at sticker off of waitlist*
*Has 0 work experience and a degree in art history*
*Is making 'smart, educated choice' to attend law school*
*Will definitely work very hard to do well, be in top 25% of class, get Biglaw*
*Makes this face*
Image
CG614 wrote:
Capitol A wrote:I believe that this is important information, and that there are probably a lot of people that still think a law degree (ANY law degree) is a ticket to fame and fortune. Those people would definitely benefit from a wake up call before taking on hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt pursuing a path in which the odds are stacked against them ever securing gainful employment.
All this being said, I don't think I have a similar reaction to this type of info that most TLSers seem to. You see a lot of TLS posts that say things like: "If you attend school X you only have a 1 in 10 chance at BigLaw" as if there is some type of raffle at the school to determine who gets the 'good' jobs. It doesn't work like that. This same logic would have given the same advice to me and to George Clooney regarding pursuing careers in acting: "don't do it. You have a 1 in a million chance of actually making money." When the truth is that he is talented and good looking. I, on the other hand am just good looking-no talent. So we don't each have an equal shot as in the case of some type of lottery system.
My point is, if you are going to Cooley or to Phoenix SOL, you are making a terrible investment; but if you are going to Ohio State, or Alabama, or some other mid-range T50 where they are realistically putting 40% or so of their grads into full time legal employment, then it is at least in part up to you, and your talent and your work ethic to determine whether you are in the group that makes the school proud or you are in the group that they report as being employed even though you are walking behind the elephants at the local circus. No one is going to hand you anything on a silver platter or write you check just because you have a JD, but if you are willing to bust your butt to ensure you are a standout perfomer in class and in your internships/externships etc. Some people are getting good jobs, and you can be one of those people.

And the problem with your analysis is that it assumes that "busting your butt" can give you an advantage. Don't you think everyone is "busting their butt?" Since you can't reasonably predict grades/employment (outside of some other factors like work experience), it is reasonable to use the 1 in 10 (numbers depending on school) model for success.
Case in point

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby scammedhard » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:17 pm

aliarrow wrote:
scammedhard wrote:
aliarrow wrote:TBF, 2010 data is expected to be the worst data of all.

Also, what exactly do you propose the ABA does? If they just shut down schools and take away accreditation they run into anti-trust issues.

I don't see/hear the AMA, APA, ADA, or other prefessional organzitions running into anti-trust issues.
The ABA should FORCE schools to release accurate and honest employment data and have the data audited regulalry. They should also raise the bar passage standards and close down schools that have awful attrition rates, like Cooley, Jefferson, Barry, and half the other TTTs. I see no anti-trust issues there. Just preventing stupid people from being scammed.


You have to take into consideration that the ABA doesn't deal with reasonable benign organizations and people, they deal with lawyers.

Yes. But the ABA is the most powerful legal organization in the US. This is madneess, and if it doesn't get stopped, things are gonna end badly. You and I know that this cannot continue for long-time. There will be serious repercusions for the legal profession. If the ABA can't do it, fine, get rid of them and have someone else be the regualtor of legal education.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:25 pm

scammedhard wrote:
aliarrow wrote:
scammedhard wrote:
aliarrow wrote:TBF, 2010 data is expected to be the worst data of all.

Also, what exactly do you propose the ABA does? If they just shut down schools and take away accreditation they run into anti-trust issues.

I don't see/hear the AMA, APA, ADA, or other prefessional organzitions running into anti-trust issues.
The ABA should FORCE schools to release accurate and honest employment data and have the data audited regulalry. They should also raise the bar passage standards and close down schools that have awful attrition rates, like Cooley, Jefferson, Barry, and half the other TTTs. I see no anti-trust issues there. Just preventing stupid people from being scammed.


You have to take into consideration that the ABA doesn't deal with reasonable benign organizations and people, they deal with lawyers.

Yes. But the ABA is the most powerful legal organization in the US. This is madneess, and if it doesn't get stopped, things are gonna end badly. You and I know that this cannot continue for long-time. There will be serious repercusions for the legal profession. If the ABA can't do it, fine, get rid of them and have someone else be the regualtor of legal education.


US News?
But i just... don't even know. The hiring model that was in place pre-recession wasn't even around that long, so everything is changing so fast its hard to really make any sort of predictions in regard to law schools or legal employment in general other than 'it sucks'. Who really knows what direction this all will take? Things will likely be drastically different even 5 or 10 years from now.

I do think the amount of risk actually is somewhat necessary though given the biglaw hiring model. There are NO other career or education path that give as good of a chance (relatively speaking, it still isn't a good chance overall) of making six figures while still in your mid-20s. So the nature of the beast is that many are going to flock to it and only the strongest survive. I think the argument to be made would be to scale down biglaw salaries (and tuition prices as well) and make law more appealing to those who truly want to be lawyers while not attracting every greedy asshole in the country who couldn't succeed at something else. A more normalized distribution with maybe $60-80k being the norm right out of school.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18426
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby bk1 » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:27 pm

scammedhard wrote:This is madneess, and if it doesn't get stopped, things are gonna end badly. You and I know that this cannot continue for long-time. There will be serious repercusions for the legal profession. If the ABA can't do it, fine, get rid of them and have someone else be the regualtor of legal education.


Madness...? This is Sparta!

Couldn't help myself.

aliarrow
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Article: How Law Schools Misrepresent Employment Prospects

Postby aliarrow » Mon Apr 25, 2011 5:29 pm

bk1 wrote:
scammedhard wrote:This is madneess, and if it doesn't get stopped, things are gonna end badly. You and I know that this cannot continue for long-time. There will be serious repercusions for the legal profession. If the ABA can't do it, fine, get rid of them and have someone else be the regualtor of legal education.


Madness...? This is Sparta!

Couldn't help myself.


good call




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests