Bama U(25k) v Minnesota (25k) Forum

[MidwestJosh]

I don't really take seriously what the vast majority of academics have to say about legal hiring, because they're hopelessly ignorant (Just the other day, a prof. told me to look forward to 3L OCI, LOL).

This I'll agree with, (although 3L OCI is a real thing, so I'm not sure what you mean there.)

[rad lulz]

.

[romothesavior]

I will say at last Campos brings solid facts and statistics to bear, whereas Leiter is just another ivory tower duder who has no idea what things are like for the majority of law grads. I don't really take seriously what the vast majority of academics have to say about legal hiring, because they're hopelessly ignorant (Just the other day, a prof. told me to look forward to 3L OCI, LOL). Also, what his "academic reputation" is doesn't really have any bearing on what whether he says is true or not.

Campos has a poor academic reputation, I won't deny this. But he is shedding good light on the employment issue. Total ad hom to ignore the message because he sucks as prof or something.

Tamanaha has a fantastic academic reputation and is saying a lot of the same things. Profs are starting to get on board with this, slowly but surely.

Also, Leiter is a d-bag.

[rad lulz]

.

[sunynp]

OP here are the numbers, I think you should at least look at this. Instead of going back and adding in the numbers from a part of Campos post today. I thought I would make a new post:

Minnesota is currently a top 20 school, yet only 191 of 284 graduates (67.25%) were known to have a "long-term" position of any kind, law-related or not. Yet even this number is misleading. It includes seven "long-term" positions funded by the law school, and it counts 34 of 39 judicial clerkships as "long-term." (20 of those 34 "long-term" clerkships are state and local rather than federal.).

The explanation for this is probably that NALP defines "short-term" employment as a definite term of less than one year, so a contract of exactly one year in duration counts as "long-term." (Although NALP has treated judicial clerkships as short-term employment in its national stats, I've been told that beginning this year it is going to start categorizing one-year clerkships as long-term. If this is correct, the organization is helping law schools mislead prospective students about the actual long-term employment rate of graduates nine months out).

The Minnesota stats also include 28 "long-term" jobs in "business and industry" (How many of these jobs require a law degree? How many of them are in retail?), plus 36 "long-term" jobs working for law firms of less than 11 attorneys, or as solos. Indeed, if we count up the jobs Minnesota graduates had nine months after graduation that could be defined (very liberally) as real legal jobs, in the sense of "jobs someone might have considered an acceptable outcome ex ante before investing $160K and three years to get a JD" we get:

64 jobs with law firms of more than ten lawyers

20 "government" jobs

7 public interest jobs

15 federal clerkships

(Note it's not even clear that all these jobs are full-time and/or JD required).

That's 106 positions out of 284 graduates, or 37.2%. This number, probably not coincidentally, tracks closely with the number of graduates for whom Minnesota has salary data: 37% of those working in private industry; 30% of those working in public positions.

[MidwestJosh]

Here's the actual data. http://law.umn.edu/careers/career-facts ... stics.html

Campos simply ignores the existence of much of that information, improperly implying - for example, that UMN hasn't collected data on JD v. non JD positions. Campos' isn't just borderline unethical - he's well over the line. It's no coincidence that he cross-blogs with the likes of Paul Caron, who has stated that law schools are committing "malpractice" when they don't take every opportunity to lie to students. See: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog ... ctice.html

And here's what I can find for Alabama. http://www.law.ua.edu/career-services/p ... -students/

A bit of a transparency difference, no?

[Tiago Splitter]

Here's the actual data. http://law.umn.edu/careers/career-facts ... stics.html

Campos simply ignores the existence of much of that information, improperly implying - for example, that UMN hasn't collected data on JD v. non JD positions.

And here's what I can find for Alabama. http://www.law.ua.edu/career-services/p ... -students/

A bit of a transparency difference, no?

Sure, the transparency is nice. But Campos said that UMN's employment situation wasn't very good, especially for a "Top 20" school. The data you've given suggest he's accurate on this count.

Also:

Percent of all 2010 graduates known to be employed in the private sector who reported salary data: 37%

[MidwestJosh]

Sure, the transparency is nice. But Campos said that UMN's employment situation wasn't very good, especially for a "Top 20" school. The data you've given suggest he's accurate on this count.

Also:

Percent of all 2010 graduates known to be employed in the private sector who reported salary data: 37%

First of all, what about this data suggests that employment prospects are bad? I'm incredibly curious, especially because Campos' inferences clearly didn't take all of that data into account. For example, the thrust of his argument focuses on lack of data surrounding whether the placements required legal education. Yet, the UMN data clearly indicates bar admission is required for the majority of its placements. Last I checked, a J.D. was a requirement to be admitted to the bar in almost every jurisdiction. So what about UMN's employment data do YOU find to indicate that employment prospects aren't good?

Secondly, UMN has 100% of its graduates' job status known. That's a hell of a lot more transparency than what the VAST MAJORITY of the 200+ ABA law schools are providing. But UMN can't compel their graduates to provide every shred of info though.

By the way - let's not forget that this thread is about the merits of UMN v. Alabama. Not UMN v. Campos' intentionally doom and gloom-biased inferences that purposely mislead readers by leaving out significant information. My point is that far more substantive information needs to be on the table than was floating around this echo-forum. I really do have a lot of work to do. See ya'll tomorrow.

[MTBike]

Thats because people like Campos LOVE to pull those bullshit statistics about the "percentage of all law students"... If we looked at the stats of, say, only the top 100 schools in the nation? I can almost guarantee the unemployment numbers arent near as scary.

Campos uses skewed stats to his advantage... it may sound like he is putting something on the table, but he's feeding you a plate of bullshit purely because he likes to watch other people eat it.

[chiwachiwa]

I'm not sure what problem you all have with Campos' stats. Just look at the table on the UMN site (http://law.umn.edu/careers/career-facts ... stics.html) titled Type of Employment for Graduates Known to be Employed and add up the numbers. How many graduates have jobs that would have, ex ante, been considered "worthwhile to go to law school for?"

First, let's take the law firm jobs. I'm not going to count 1-10 attorney jobs, because those are almost without exception shitlaw jobs paying $35k to do DUI defense, etc. Excluding those (and generously including the "unknown" category) = 64
I'll include all federal clerkships but no state or local clerkships = 14
I'll include all public interest jobs, assuming (generously) that everyone who went into PI actually wanted it and isn't just scrambling for something, anything = 7
For "business" and "government" categories, I'll apply the ratio of [bar required jobs : all jobs], which isn't broken out by category, to these jobs, assuming that it applies equally across all categories. (Of course, that assumption is again generous because it's likely the vast majority of non-bar required jobs are "business") = (28 + 20) * (205 / 261) = 38 jobs (rounding up)
I'm not including the 2 "Academia" jobs, because honestly, we all know no 1st year JD from UMN is getting a law prof gig = 0

That's a grand total of: 64 + 14 + 7 + 38 = 123 jobs. Out of 284 graduates = 43%. This is more generous than the Campos numbers, and I'd challenge anyone to tell me why my analysis is materially unfair. Sure, you can quibble about whether academia jobs should be included, but no matter what you do you're not getting the number even close to top-line reported number of 92% employed.

Caveat, before the biker guy comes after me: I am a current 3L, I have done very well grades-wise, have a job and a clerkship. I still believe that ex ante the decision to go to law school is a bad one for most people. OP included if he is only choosing between two regional schools in regions to which he has no ties.

[MidwestJosh]

I'm not sure what problem you all have with Campos' stats. Just look at the table on the UMN site (http://law.umn.edu/careers/career-facts ... stics.html) titled Type of Employment for Graduates Known to be Employed and add up the numbers. How many graduates have jobs that would have, ex ante, been considered "worthwhile to go to law school for?"

First, let's take the law firm jobs. I'm not going to count 1-10 attorney jobs, because those are almost without exception shitlaw jobs paying $35k to do DUI defense, etc. Excluding those (and generously including the "unknown" category) = 64
I'll include all federal clerkships but no state or local clerkships = 14
I'll include all public interest jobs, assuming (generously) that everyone who went into PI actually wanted it and isn't just scrambling for something, anything = 7
For "business" and "government" categories, I'll apply the ratio of [bar required jobs : all jobs], which isn't broken out by category, to these jobs, assuming that it applies equally across all categories. (Of course, that assumption is again generous because it's likely the vast majority of non-bar required jobs are "business") = (28 + 20) * (205 / 261) = 38 jobs (rounding up)
I'm not including the 2 "Academia" jobs, because honestly, we all know no 1st year JD from UMN is getting a law prof gig = 0

That's a grand total of: 64 + 14 + 7 + 38 = 123 jobs. Out of 284 graduates = 43%. This is more generous than the Campos numbers, and I'd challenge anyone to tell me why my analysis is materially unfair. Sure, you can quibble about whether academia jobs should be included, but no matter what you do you're not getting the number even close to top-line reported number of 92% employed.

Caveat, before the biker guy comes after me: I am a current 3L, I have done very well grades-wise, have a job and a clerkship. I still believe that ex ante the decision to go to law school is a bad one for most people. OP included if he is only choosing between two regional schools in regions to which he has no ties.

Well, I'm at a firm 2-10 in size and will be making 90K. I know for a fact there are several former UMNer's with similar numbers. I won't begin to address the plethora of your other misguided, uninformed assumptions and statistical manipulations and will instead strongly suggest that you go to a school with a full ride. Forget T14 or regional+full scholly advice. For the likes of you, it is clearly best that you not have a single penny of debt, or else I suspect you'll be on this blog with the likes of those from JDunderground not long after graduation if even the slightest part of your plan goes astray.

I'm not sure what problem you all have with Campos' stats.

I can see why you don't see that.

[Tiago Splitter]

Well, I'm at a firm 2-10 in size and will be making 90K. I know for a fact there are several former UMNer's with similar numbers.

Considering Minnesota BigLaw barely pays six figures these are excellent outcomes. Do you think your situation is representative of the large number of people that end up at these firms?

[MidwestJosh]

Well, I'm at a firm 2-10 in size and will be making 90K. I know for a fact there are several former UMNer's with similar numbers.

Considering Minnesota BigLaw barely pays six figures these are excellent outcomes. Do you think your situation is representative of the large number of people that end up at these firms?

I don't know that I can say largely representative, but I know of at least 4 off the top of my head in small firms making between 75 and 95. And while that's anecdotal, I haven't heard much grumbling about salaries.

MN BigLaw jobs are mostly paying 120 right now. There are a couple 110 stragglers and 2 125's, but that's the majority at the moment. That's not really different than across the country. With the exception of NYC, pretty much all city markets are usually the same.

[MidwestJosh]

...assuming (generously) that everyone who went into PI actually wanted it and isn't just scrambling for something, anything...

By the way... your attitude is indicative of the very kind of desperation demonstrated by those who go into law school not understanding what they're getting into and who fail to fully accept that responsibly. Your assumption that everyone is like that is wrong.

[Real Madrid]

Make the best possible choice you can, consider all options, and if UMN is your best option then do not hesitate to go. Ask anyone outside of this hell hole of a forum full of ignorant 0L's, and they will give you the same advice.

You realize almost everyone posting in here about the dangers of going to these schools is a current law student, right? If you got outside of this "hell hole of a forum of ignorant 0Ls" and asked some of the unemployed 2Ls and 3Ls at these "vaunted T20s" that you speak of, they'd say the same thing we are. No one is disparaging these schools; we're just saying that OP should consider looking at other options.

Also, you are very good at making a straw man out of other people's arguments. Where'd you learn to do that? It's an impressive skill that will take you far in the law.

These "unemployed 2 and 3L's" you speak of, are most likely the ones that didnt do well in LS which fits my argument perfectly.

And no, radlulz said quite clearly not to go to UMN. Not that he should consider other options then go of UMN is the correct fit, which is what I said.

Please stop white knighting radlulz in every thread he posts in... I've noticed that and I've only been posting on here for a month or so

So true. Annoying and bizarre.

[rad lulz]

.

[MTBike]

Dude stop white knighting MTBike. It's so annoying and bizarre.

Uh oh!! Real Madrid must've hit a nerve, because Radlulz is acting like a child now... truth hurts dude.

[rad lulz]

.

[JCFindley]

Dude stop white knighting MTBike. It's so annoying and bizarre.

Uh oh!! Real Madrid must've hit a nerve, because Radlulz is acting like a child now... truth hurts dude.

wut

Your humor was wasted on some it seems....

[MTBike]

Dude stop white knighting MTBike. It's so annoying and bizarre.

Uh oh!! Real Madrid must've hit a nerve, because Radlulz is acting like a child now... truth hurts dude.

wut

Your humor was wasted on some it seems....

--ImageRemoved--

[timbs4339]

This couldn't be further from the truth. 70% of Minnesota's class comes from out of state 60% leave the state upon graduation. In terms of big law and government jobs, take a gander at the NALP statistics.

It's more like 64% stay in the state. 74% in the Midwest region.

http://www.law.umn.edu/careers/career-f ... stics.html

You can all go back to killing each other now.

[goldenflash19]

Uh oh!! Real Madrid must've hit a nerve, because Radlulz is acting like a child now... truth hurts dude.

Truth? You're the one saying it's fine to go to "top 20" school with no ties and speculating that the kids without jobs are the ones with bad grades. Almost nothing you've said ITT has been true.

You keep calling people trolls, but in reality you're worse than a troll. You are saying stuff that simply isn't true and are giving terrible advice. When I post in these forums, I'd rather get honest feedback than false feedback.

[top30man]

This couldn't be further from the truth. 70% of Minnesota's class comes from out of state 60% leave the state upon graduation. In terms of big law and government jobs, take a gander at the NALP statistics.

It's more like 64% stay in the state. 74% in the Midwest region.

http://www.law.umn.edu/careers/career-f ... stics.html

You can all go back to killing each other now.

Imma let you finish but.....here are the stats. OP, I hope someone has been helpful itt. In summary, rad lulz is right. Both are too risky with no ties.

[murray18]

Uh oh!! Real Madrid must've hit a nerve, because Radlulz is acting like a child now... truth hurts dude.

Truth? You're the one saying it's fine to go to "top 20" school with no ties and speculating that the kids without jobs are the ones with bad grades. Almost nothing you've said ITT has been true.

You keep calling people trolls, but in reality you're worse than a troll. You are saying stuff that simply isn't true and are giving terrible advice. When I post in these forums, I'd rather get honest feedback than false feedback.

+1

Radlulz is definitely right ITT. My opinion: Something closer to home would be better, but if you HAVE to go somewhere you have no ties, follow the money and hustle like crazy for a job.

[MidwestJosh]

This couldn't be further from the truth. 70% of Minnesota's class comes from out of state 60% leave the state upon graduation. In terms of big law and government jobs, take a gander at the NALP statistics.

It's more like 64% stay in the state. 74% in the Midwest region.

http://www.law.umn.edu/careers/career-f ... stics.html

You can all go back to killing each other now.

2010 was off balance of the traditional 555-60% leave/40-45% stay. Alan Haynes (Career Center Director) has the year-to-year data. For the class of 2009, for example, it was 58% left and 42% stayed. You're free to call Alan to discuss those numbers, he'll be more than candid with you.