Class of 2013 Employment Data Forum

[rayiner]

AJD and 3 year JD/MBA programs make me skeptical that cutting out a year of school will reduce total tuition in any way.

Schools are being forced to cut the cost of attendence. The question is, how will they do it? Right now, they're giving an effective discount by throwing more scholarship money at matriculants. But cutting the third year means cutting $20-25k of COA, even if they charge the same total amount of tuition. That's $20-25k less of a discount that they have to give in terms of more scholarship money.

It's a total no-brainer, and only some academic eggheads would oppose the move.

[cotiger]

AJD and 3 year JD/MBA programs make me skeptical that cutting out a year of school will reduce total tuition in any way.

Schools are being forced to cut the cost of attendence. The question is, how will they do it? Right now, they're giving an effective discount by throwing more scholarship money at matriculants. But cutting the third year means cutting $20-25k of COA, even if they charge the same total amount of tuition. That's $20-25k less of a discount that they have to give in terms of more scholarship money.

It's a total no-brainer, and only some academic eggheads would oppose the move.

Are they, though? I bet that yearly 4-5% increase outweighs any additional scholarships that they're giving people. 60% of NU peeps are paying sticker.

[jbagelboy]

That and faculty need to be majorly trimmed. Why are there are like 1 faculty for ever 9 students but 1L sections are like 65-100 people. Fuck that noise. Faculty to student should be way higher.

Lol, even some faculty agree with this. At dinner a few wks ago our crim prof talked about how ridiculously overstaffed CLS faculty is. Our "student to faculty" ratio might be amazing, but now institutions should realize that is a drawback because it just balloons cost with little practical advantage to students (at least at small differences in gradation).

Eliminating the expenditures-per-student quotient in the USNWR survey should improve this a little.

[cotiger]

That and faculty need to be majorly trimmed. Why are there are like 1 faculty for ever 9 students but 1L sections are like 65-100 people. Fuck that noise. Faculty to student should be way higher.

Lol, even some faculty agree with this. At dinner a few wks ago our crim prof talked about how ridiculously overstaffed CLS faculty is. Our "student to faculty" ratio might be amazing, but now institutions should realize that is a drawback because it just balloons cost with little practical advantage to students (at least at small differences in gradation).

Eliminating the expenditures-per-student quotient in the USNWR survey should improve this a little.

Why do 1L classes have to be so huge? Can't those "overstaffed" faculty teach then?

I've literally never been in a class with more than 25 people.

[09042014]

That and faculty need to be majorly trimmed. Why are there are like 1 faculty for ever 9 students but 1L sections are like 65-100 people. Fuck that noise. Faculty to student should be way higher.

Lol, even some faculty agree with this. At dinner a few wks ago our crim prof talked about how ridiculously overstaffed CLS faculty is. Our "student to faculty" ratio might be amazing, but now institutions should realize that is a drawback because it just balloons cost with little practical advantage to students (at least at small differences in gradation).

Eliminating the expenditures-per-student quotient in the USNWR survey should improve this a little.

Why do 1L classes have to be so huge? Can't those "overstaffed" faculty teach then?

I've literally never been in a class with more than 25 people.

Because in a lecture setting it doesn't even matter 25 is effectively the same as 100.

[jbagelboy]

AJD and 3 year JD/MBA programs make me skeptical that cutting out a year of school will reduce total tuition in any way.

Schools are being forced to cut the cost of attendence. The question is, how will they do it? Right now, they're giving an effective discount by throwing more scholarship money at matriculants. But cutting the third year means cutting $20-25k of COA, even if they charge the same total amount of tuition. That's $20-25k less of a discount that they have to give in terms of more scholarship money.

It's a total no-brainer, and only some academic eggheads would oppose the move.

Are they, though? I bet that yearly 4-5% increase outweighs any additional scholarships that they're giving people. 60% of NU peeps are paying sticker.

Believe it or not, schools claim $60K/year in tuition and fees isn't enough to pay the way for an actual student. I personally find this egregious, considering that doesn't include housing (although they basically give us free meals every day). So no matter how they limit scholarships they are still effectively bleeding.

[jbagelboy]

That and faculty need to be majorly trimmed. Why are there are like 1 faculty for ever 9 students but 1L sections are like 65-100 people. Fuck that noise. Faculty to student should be way higher.

Lol, even some faculty agree with this. At dinner a few wks ago our crim prof talked about how ridiculously overstaffed CLS faculty is. Our "student to faculty" ratio might be amazing, but now institutions should realize that is a drawback because it just balloons cost with little practical advantage to students (at least at small differences in gradation).

Eliminating the expenditures-per-student quotient in the USNWR survey should improve this a little.

Why do 1L classes have to be so huge? Can't those "overstaffed" faculty teach then?

I've literally never been in a class with more than 25 people.

Actually, only 5 of your classes 1L year will be huge (at least for us). You have a "small section" first semester that's about 25-30. LPW is like 12. Electives range, but mine is 30ish right now.

[cotiger]

AJD and 3 year JD/MBA programs make me skeptical that cutting out a year of school will reduce total tuition in any way.

Schools are being forced to cut the cost of attendence. The question is, how will they do it? Right now, they're giving an effective discount by throwing more scholarship money at matriculants. But cutting the third year means cutting $20-25k of COA, even if they charge the same total amount of tuition. That's $20-25k less of a discount that they have to give in terms of more scholarship money.

It's a total no-brainer, and only some academic eggheads would oppose the move.

Are they, though? I bet that yearly 4-5% increase outweighs any additional scholarships that they're giving people. 60% of NU peeps are paying sticker.

Believe it or not, schools claim $60K/year in tuition and fees isn't enough to pay the way for an actual student. I personally find this egregious, considering that doesn't include housing (although they basically give us free meals every day). So no matter how they limit scholarships they are still effectively bleeding.

I thought that law schools served as profit centers for the rest of the university.

That's obviously not the case for struggling ttts anymore, but for t14?

[Tiago Splitter]

Because in a lecture setting it doesn't even matter 25 is effectively the same as 100.

And a lot of people realize once they're here that the 100 man class is much better. Certainly easier to sleep through. I had a 190 person class during 1L that turned out to be fantastic.

[JCougar]

AJD and 3 year JD/MBA programs make me skeptical that cutting out a year of school will reduce total tuition in any way.

Schools are being forced to cut the cost of attendence. The question is, how will they do it? Right now, they're giving an effective discount by throwing more scholarship money at matriculants. But cutting the third year means cutting $20-25k of COA, even if they charge the same total amount of tuition. That's $20-25k less of a discount that they have to give in terms of more scholarship money.

It's a total no-brainer, and only some academic eggheads would oppose the move.

But then a law degree would lose the prestige of being a Doctorate!

[20141023]

.

[aboutmydaylight]

I thought that law schools served as profit centers for the rest of the university.

That's obviously not the case for struggling ttts anymore, but for t14?

Law schools (and business schools) pay their faculty a shit-ton more than normal professors, so although law schools might not need to purchase special equipment or facilities to teach class, they are generally dropping a lot more on their professors. Unfortunately, the top schools usually decline to tell how much they pay their faculty. None of the T14 responded to the Society of American Law Teacher's salary survey, but random pieces of information hint at things like Harvard paying Elizabeth Warren $350,000 a year just to teach 1 class. The thing with top law schools is that they have to pay a ton of money to the leading legal scholars to keep them there, so I could easily imagine that they are bleeding money. However, I honestly think that is retarded because I don't think it makes a difference if some amazing legal scholar teaches you versus some random guy.

Also, something lulzy about the salary survey I linked above is that the tenured professors at UC Hastings, which has like a 50% FTLT employment rate, are paid $187,000 a year. What a fucking joke.

Finally, as Tiago said, I've also enjoyed my larger classes more since it means fewer cold calls.

UC salaries are public. I'm not sure about other public schools but Berkeley at least discloses that.

https://ucannualwage.ucop.edu/wage/

B/E/E (Business/Economics/Engineering) and Law are compensated very well.

Here's the official schedules (table 8 ): http://apo.berkeley.edu/scales13_14.html

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah, state universities have to disclose salaries - the privates doubtless don't. The argument is that the people with the qualifications to teach law could get the top-paying law jobs, and so law schools have to pay more to be able to compete. But honestly all the legal faculty I know were fleeing biglaw as fast as they could, so I feel like that economic advantage is pretty hypothetical.

(Am also slightly resentful since legal faculty make more than 2x the salary of most humanities profs at the same status, with much less education!)

[jbagelboy]

I thought that law schools served as profit centers for the rest of the university.

That's obviously not the case for struggling ttts anymore, but for t14?

Law schools (and business schools) pay their faculty a shit-ton more than normal professors, so although law schools might not need to purchase special equipment or facilities to teach class, they are generally dropping a lot more on their professors. Unfortunately, the top schools usually decline to tell how much they pay their faculty. None of the T14 responded to the Society of American Law Teacher's salary survey, but random pieces of information hint at things like Harvard paying Elizabeth Warren $350,000 a year just to teach 1 class. The thing with top law schools is that they have to pay a ton of money to the leading legal scholars to keep them there, so I could easily imagine that they are bleeding money. However, I honestly think that is retarded because I don't think it makes a difference if some amazing legal scholar teaches you versus some random guy.

I would take issue with this last part for a couple reasons. While "professor quality" isn't necessarily much of an issue, connections will be. Many niche positions with legal agencies, government bodies and public interest organizations are networked via professor contacts. Imagine what Elizabeth Warren could get you if you were interested in Massachusetts politics? My intuition is that a large part of the reason why HYSCCN produce so many important figures or place in niche positions is the faculty connections.

Also, famous faculty tend to know federal judges (actually, one of my profs is a federal judge). If you want to line up a clerkship, snagging a class with your future boss' sunday tennis doubles partner will make a big difference. Having Posner at UChi must have an impact.

Obviously just being in these peoples' classes or presence won't get you shit, you have to impress them. But I can understand why the school would pay an extra six figures to give students the opportunity to impress them.

[20141023]

.

[Princetonlaw68]

If I were to guess, I'd say that the top 3 reasons schools pay so much for the most highly regarded professors are as follows:

1. Prestige
2. Prestige
3. Prestige

[haus]

If I were to guess, I'd say that the top 3 reasons schools pay so much for the most highly regarded professors are as follows:

1. Prestige
2. Prestige
3. Prestige

What?? I thought the schools were simply taken in by that "new professor smell".

[Princetonlaw68]

If I were to guess, I'd say that the top 3 reasons schools pay so much for the most highly regarded professors are as follows:

1. Prestige
2. Prestige
3. Prestige

What?? I thought the schools were simply taken in by that "new professor smell".

[09042014]

NU data rundown:

67% report over 100k in salary

Another 8% are fed clerks

Another 5% are gov't employees

That's at least 80% with a good outcome. Not too shabby.

[Princetonlaw68]

NU data rundown:

67% report over 100k in salary

Another 8% are fed clerks

Another 5% are gov't employees

That's at least 80% with a good outcome. Not too shabby.

Government employee isn't always a good outcome.

(By the way, where can I find these numbers for other schools?)

[09042014]

NU data rundown:

67% report over 100k in salary

Another 8% are fed clerks

Another 5% are gov't employees

That's at least 80% with a good outcome. Not too shabby.

Government employee isn't always a good outcome.

(By the way, where can I find these numbers for other schools?)

With LRAP and IBR yes they are.

[worldtraveler]

NU data rundown:

67% report over 100k in salary

Another 8% are fed clerks

Another 5% are gov't employees

That's at least 80% with a good outcome. Not too shabby.

Government employee isn't always a good outcome.

(By the way, where can I find these numbers for other schools?)

Given how hard it is to get a gov job right now, no one just stumbles into one if they don't want one.

[20141023]

.

[Princetonlaw68]

(By the way, where can I find these numbers for other schools?)

Until the official ABA Employment Summary Questionnaire for 2013 is released, you can just Google the law school you want and then look for the "2013 ABA Employment Summary"; schools are required to put this on their sites, so most of them should have it up by now.

No, I know. I'm specifically referring to those salary numbers. Is that just a Northwestern thing?

[09042014]

(By the way, where can I find these numbers for other schools?)

Until the official ABA Employment Summary Questionnaire for 2013 is released, you can just Google the law school you want and then look for the "2013 ABA Employment Summary"; schools are required to put this on their sites, so most of them should have it up by now.

Salary data isn't part of the aba thing.