Landing in Academia Forum

[crazywafflez]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

[johndooley]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

When you say don't make very much, are we talking 20k a year, 30k, 100k? If you dont feel comfortable being precise thats fine but I would like to know the range.

[Anonymous User]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

Gives me strong vibes of someone who has never written research-intensive 50 page law review articles, taught in a classroom, or heard that profs have other service obligations beyond research/writing. Being a professor is in many ways a great gig, but to pretend like it's a sub-10 hour week is a special type of delusional. The idea in other posts (presumably by this same poster) that you can just turn it off once you get tenure is also silly considering the fact that you have tenure at an ABA accredited law school meant you probably spent the first 25 years of your life being raised via concerted cultivation and grinding it out through elite undergrad/law schools and then another 5 years in practice, elite clerkships, or competitive fellowships while writing and then another 5 years publishing to get tenure and then just turning it off. Good luck with that. If you're willing to go through all of that shit, you're probably not wired that way.

Exactly.

Yea profs are such busy people........

Actually, they are. Have you ever worked as one or had friends who worked as one? (And I don't mean at an infilaw school.) Your hypothetical schedule is absurd.

I'm not saying you have to value law profs' work, but that's not the same as them being lazy.

[Anonymous User]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

Curious about the bolded. Is it hard to get tenure on the law faculty as an adjunct at a T3-T2 in Middle USA? Or is that generally true for all law schools, even if you're initially hired on TT?

[johndooley]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

Gives me strong vibes of someone who has never written research-intensive 50 page law review articles, taught in a classroom, or heard that profs have other service obligations beyond research/writing. Being a professor is in many ways a great gig, but to pretend like it's a sub-10 hour week is a special type of delusional. The idea in other posts (presumably by this same poster) that you can just turn it off once you get tenure is also silly considering the fact that you have tenure at an ABA accredited law school meant you probably spent the first 25 years of your life being raised via concerted cultivation and grinding it out through elite undergrad/law schools and then another 5 years in practice, elite clerkships, or competitive fellowships while writing and then another 5 years publishing to get tenure and then just turning it off. Good luck with that. If you're willing to go through all of that shit, you're probably not wired that way.

Exactly.

Yea profs are such busy people........

Actually, they are. Have you ever worked as one or had friends who worked as one? (And I don't mean at an infilaw school.) Your hypothetical schedule is absurd.

I'm not saying you have to value law profs' work, but that's not the same as them being lazy.

Ughhhh yea I was a TA. I keep in touch with many of my old professors. They actually had higher teaching loads at my law school than most, or at least more than at Stetson, UF, Ave Maria, Barry, Cooley Tampa etc.

How is the hypothetical absurd? That is how much most professors teach. Most law review articles are worthless, anyone who spent over 100 hours on them (two hours a week for a year with Christmas break) is a clown.

Yea most of them are lazy, especially the older they are. They recycle the same lectures every year and write nonsense for students to edit. It really doesn't get any better than public housing/EBT/free metro cards with no job.

[johndooley]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

Curious about the bolded. Is it hard to get tenure on the law faculty as an adjunct at a T3-T2 in Middle USA? Or is that generally true for all law schools, even if you're initially hired on TT?

Hard at all. THey get away with making every position an adjunct one that they can.

[Anonymous User]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

When you say don't make very much, are we talking 20k a year, 30k, 100k? If you dont feel comfortable being precise thats fine but I would like to know the range.

The adjuncts at my local (state) law school make around $3500-10,000 a year - it looks like for a number of them, it's $1750 per course. If you're a lecturer/instructor - more likely to be full time whereas adjunct is usually one course at a time - it looks like it ranges from $26-50k. (I picked a state school b/c generally state salaries have to be public so you can look this stuff up; I'd imagine HYS pay more.)

Re: tenure, yes, it's hard to get - not necessarily so much that lots of people are getting turned down at the tenure stage, but that it's hard to get on the tenure track to begin with, even at a T2-T3 in middle America. Someone else has already said this, but go to the school's website and look at the credentials of those who got hired most recently. I do think that as you go down the rankings, you see more schools hiring more of their alums, but I do think most of them are clinical or legal writing profs, not doctrinal.

[Anonymous User]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

Gives me strong vibes of someone who has never written research-intensive 50 page law review articles, taught in a classroom, or heard that profs have other service obligations beyond research/writing. Being a professor is in many ways a great gig, but to pretend like it's a sub-10 hour week is a special type of delusional. The idea in other posts (presumably by this same poster) that you can just turn it off once you get tenure is also silly considering the fact that you have tenure at an ABA accredited law school meant you probably spent the first 25 years of your life being raised via concerted cultivation and grinding it out through elite undergrad/law schools and then another 5 years in practice, elite clerkships, or competitive fellowships while writing and then another 5 years publishing to get tenure and then just turning it off. Good luck with that. If you're willing to go through all of that shit, you're probably not wired that way.

Exactly.

Yea profs are such busy people........

Actually, they are. Have you ever worked as one or had friends who worked as one? (And I don't mean at an infilaw school.) Your hypothetical schedule is absurd.

I'm not saying you have to value law profs' work, but that's not the same as them being lazy.

Ughhhh yea I was a TA. I keep in touch with many of my old professors. They actually had higher teaching loads at my law school than most, or at least more than at Stetson, UF, Ave Maria, Barry, Cooley Tampa etc.

How is the hypothetical absurd? That is how much most professors teach. Most law review articles are worthless, anyone who spent over 100 hours on them (two hours a week for a year with Christmas break) is a clown.

Yea most of them are lazy, especially the older they are. They recycle the same lectures every year and write nonsense for students to edit. It really doesn't get any better than public housing/EBT/free metro cards with no job.

Your hypothetical schedule is just the most stereotypical caricature of the lazy professor. Again, just b/c you think law review articles are worthless doesn't mean that they don't take a lot of time to write. Students don't manufacture law review articles (or citations) out of whole cloth for faculty, even if they do a lot of editing.

Profs don't just get to turn down all committee assignments/other service requirements because they feel like it. That's one of the three categories of work you get evaluated on.

You can recycle some aspects of teaching, but you do have to update your course materials (you think teaching Con Law next year is going to be the same as it was this last year?). No, profs don't grade exams by word count.

And if your profs were regularly showing videos in your classes, no wonder the school shut down.

You can find someone in any kind of job who skates by without actually doing the work that the job entails. Sorry if all your profs were slackers. But that doesn't mean the job itself involves no work, just that the profs you knew didn't actually do any of it.

[johndooley]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

Gives me strong vibes of someone who has never written research-intensive 50 page law review articles, taught in a classroom, or heard that profs have other service obligations beyond research/writing. Being a professor is in many ways a great gig, but to pretend like it's a sub-10 hour week is a special type of delusional. The idea in other posts (presumably by this same poster) that you can just turn it off once you get tenure is also silly considering the fact that you have tenure at an ABA accredited law school meant you probably spent the first 25 years of your life being raised via concerted cultivation and grinding it out through elite undergrad/law schools and then another 5 years in practice, elite clerkships, or competitive fellowships while writing and then another 5 years publishing to get tenure and then just turning it off. Good luck with that. If you're willing to go through all of that shit, you're probably not wired that way.

Exactly.

Yea profs are such busy people........

Actually, they are. Have you ever worked as one or had friends who worked as one? (And I don't mean at an infilaw school.) Your hypothetical schedule is absurd.

I'm not saying you have to value law profs' work, but that's not the same as them being lazy.

Ughhhh yea I was a TA. I keep in touch with many of my old professors. They actually had higher teaching loads at my law school than most, or at least more than at Stetson, UF, Ave Maria, Barry, Cooley Tampa etc.

How is the hypothetical absurd? That is how much most professors teach. Most law review articles are worthless, anyone who spent over 100 hours on them (two hours a week for a year with Christmas break) is a clown.

Yea most of them are lazy, especially the older they are. They recycle the same lectures every year and write nonsense for students to edit. It really doesn't get any better than public housing/EBT/free metro cards with no job.

Your hypothetical schedule is just the most stereotypical caricature of the lazy professor. Again, just b/c you think law review articles are worthless doesn't mean that they don't take a lot of time to write. Students don't manufacture law review articles (or citations) out of whole cloth for faculty, even if they do a lot of editing.

Profs don't just get to turn down all committee assignments/other service requirements because they feel like it. That's one of the three categories of work you get evaluated on.

You can recycle some aspects of teaching, but you do have to update your course materials (you think teaching Con Law next year is going to be the same as it was this last year?). No, profs don't grade exams by word count.

And if your profs were regularly showing videos in your classes, no wonder the school shut down.

You can find someone in any kind of job who skates by without actually doing the work that the job entails. Sorry if all your profs were slackers. But that doesn't mean the job itself involves no work, just that the profs you knew didn't actually do any of it.

Let's think about what you said methodically...........

1. 100 hours is a fair amount of time to produce a 50 page law review article on pop culture or some novel take on the Manson murder trials. These pieces of writing just aren't that dense or complicated, sorry to break it to you. Now 50 pages of research on string theory is another story. And yes, profs send law reviews steaming piles of dog poo and the students flesh it out with all sort of citations and extra leg work. Were you on law review?

2. You get evaluated but you are tenured. It is almost impossible to fire a tenured professor, the exceptions are narrow and do not cover the situations posed. Being despised for not being a team player is not the end of the world if you are on campus 10 hours a week (and you can probably spend your time hours writing on the immigration rights of dolphins at home, making it 6-8 hours on campus).

3. You do not necessarily know how profs grade. Most students receive a range of grades. Few complain. The few who complain do not get anywhere. They can basically do whatever they want. Admins roll their eyes when they hear complaints. Profs are immune.

4. Not all con law courses are the same. Not all cover abortion or guns or any issue of the day. A lot just focus on the dormant commerce clause and separation of powers and other riveting doctrines made in the 19th century. Again, they cannot get fired. They do not need to update the materials.

5. Profs did not do that in my class. This actually happened at a school a bit outside the T13 but considered respectable by some here. He screened half a dozen courtroom movies and youtube videos of proceeding, it took up about a third of the course total and this was 1L.

6. My school shut down because of ABA nonsense, most students there were happy about attending and same with recent grads.

7. Actually, no, if an electrician does not do his job the results are clear as day (or pitch black night). If a bus driver slacks off then a bunch of people die on the highway. Likewise a doctor who just does not feel good today but will perform surgery regardless. If a law professor is great or horrible does not matter for student outcomes in their careers. They're basically baby sitters.

[12YrsAnAssociate]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

I taught a 5 credit core law school class last fall, and it was easily 30 hours of work a week. I had never taught the course before and I wanted to be REALLY good at it, so I'm sure it'd be fewer hours a second time or if I cared less. But even with years of experience I doubt you could teach even a single class in under 10 hours a week.

[johndooley]

You’d get used to the reputation. One article per year speaks to my point, being a law prof is really undemanding once there’s time wise. Students edit your papers and do the citation and substance. You write less than a page a week and teach the same 2-3 classes every year. Too easy. You can pull it off sub 10 hours a week if you want.

I taught a 5 credit core law school class last fall, and it was easily 30 hours of work a week. I had never taught the course before and I wanted to be REALLY good at it, so I'm sure it'd be fewer hours a second time or if I cared less. But even with years of experience I doubt you could teach even a single class in under 10 hours a week.

Hey man maybe that is a sign teaching is not your calling. Some just have the gift and can go up and riff without anyone knowing they are full of it. If teaching was 30 hours a week for a core law school class then I would probably stick to your day job.

[Anonymous User]

Let's think about what you said methodically...........

1. 100 hours is a fair amount of time to produce a 50 page law review article on pop culture or some novel take on the Manson murder trials. These pieces of writing just aren't that dense or complicated, sorry to break it to you. Now 50 pages of research on string theory is another story. And yes, profs send law reviews steaming piles of dog poo and the students flesh it out with all sort of citations and extra leg work. Were you on law review?

2. You get evaluated but you are tenured. It is almost impossible to fire a tenured professor, the exceptions are narrow and do not cover the situations posed. Being despised for not being a team player is not the end of the world if you are on campus 10 hours a week (and you can probably spend your time hours writing on the immigration rights of dolphins at home, making it 6-8 hours on campus).

3. You do not necessarily know how profs grade. Most students receive a range of grades. Few complain. The few who complain do not get anywhere. They can basically do whatever they want. Admins roll their eyes when they hear complaints. Profs are immune.

4. Not all con law courses are the same. Not all cover abortion or guns or any issue of the day. A lot just focus on the dormant commerce clause and separation of powers and other riveting doctrines made in the 19th century. Again, they cannot get fired. They do not need to update the materials.

5. Profs did not do that in my class. This actually happened at a school a bit outside the T13 but considered respectable by some here. He screened half a dozen courtroom movies and youtube videos of proceeding, it took up about a third of the course total and this was 1L.

6. My school shut down because of ABA nonsense, most students there were happy about attending and same with recent grads.

7. Actually, no, if an electrician does not do his job the results are clear as day (or pitch black night). If a bus driver slacks off then a bunch of people die on the highway. Likewise a doctor who just does not feel good today but will perform surgery regardless. If a law professor is great or horrible does not matter for student outcomes in their careers. They're basically baby sitters.

Please stop talking out of your fantasy of what being a prof is like. I've worked as a prof (and I was on law review) and that's just not how it works.

And the person who said it took 30 hours a week to prepare a 5-credit course for the first time is absolutely right. "Riffing without anyone knowing they are full of it" isn't teaching.

[johndooley]

Let's think about what you said methodically...........

1. 100 hours is a fair amount of time to produce a 50 page law review article on pop culture or some novel take on the Manson murder trials. These pieces of writing just aren't that dense or complicated, sorry to break it to you. Now 50 pages of research on string theory is another story. And yes, profs send law reviews steaming piles of dog poo and the students flesh it out with all sort of citations and extra leg work. Were you on law review?

2. You get evaluated but you are tenured. It is almost impossible to fire a tenured professor, the exceptions are narrow and do not cover the situations posed. Being despised for not being a team player is not the end of the world if you are on campus 10 hours a week (and you can probably spend your time hours writing on the immigration rights of dolphins at home, making it 6-8 hours on campus).

3. You do not necessarily know how profs grade. Most students receive a range of grades. Few complain. The few who complain do not get anywhere. They can basically do whatever they want. Admins roll their eyes when they hear complaints. Profs are immune.

4. Not all con law courses are the same. Not all cover abortion or guns or any issue of the day. A lot just focus on the dormant commerce clause and separation of powers and other riveting doctrines made in the 19th century. Again, they cannot get fired. They do not need to update the materials.

5. Profs did not do that in my class. This actually happened at a school a bit outside the T13 but considered respectable by some here. He screened half a dozen courtroom movies and youtube videos of proceeding, it took up about a third of the course total and this was 1L.

6. My school shut down because of ABA nonsense, most students there were happy about attending and same with recent grads.

7. Actually, no, if an electrician does not do his job the results are clear as day (or pitch black night). If a bus driver slacks off then a bunch of people die on the highway. Likewise a doctor who just does not feel good today but will perform surgery regardless. If a law professor is great or horrible does not matter for student outcomes in their careers. They're basically baby sitters.

Please stop talking out of your fantasy of what being a prof is like. I've worked as a prof (and I was on law review) and that's just not how it works.

And the person who said it took 30 hours a week to prepare a 5-credit course for the first time is absolutely right. "Riffing without anyone knowing they are full of it" isn't teaching.

The assertion a new professor, teaching two courses at 30 hours a week each, along with committee and publishing requirements, has a 70+ hour week is laughable. Did you date your professor and have some lingering loyalty to him to make his job seem loftier?

If you went up to the podium and read a hornbook or even a student outline almost verbatim they would not know the difference and you can easily give a final based on the hornbook. You are making this seem like rocket science.

[Joachim2017]

This guy is obviously either a troll or delusional, not sure there's much further value arguing with him/her.

[johndooley]

This guy is obviously either a troll or delusional, not sure there's much further value arguing with him/her.

Profs work harder than big law associates, understood. Also when someone's name is John they are usually a him.

[Anonymous User]

Look at the Lawsky hiring report, or the recent hires of Bigelow and Climenko Fellows, who are generally among the top candidates on the market. It's now not that unusual to see people with a Ph.D., a fellowship, and a clerkship or two. It's a ludicrously competitive credential race, much moreso than it was in earlier eras. Some things (grades, clerkships, journal) matter less than they used to, but PhDs, fellowships, and pubs matter more.

[Anonymous User]

Talk to your professors - especially those who are responsible for new hirings. The sense I get as I talk to them is that checking certain "traditional" boxes are helpful, including clerkship, good grades, and law review, but the most important credential is your PhD and your writing (unless you want to teach subjects like civpro or antitrust). This is especially true at higher ranked schools, at least at my T6.

[jotarokujo]

john you are talking about the 75 year old professor who gives no fucks. that's not most professors who are below the age of 50. most people have to grind to get on the tenure track and continue grinding until they get tenure. then once they have tenure at age ~40 they slow down and it becomes maybe a 40 hr a week job. again this can be less if you decide to seriously slack but that's just not most professors who are non-geriatrics. it is absurd to think most professors do not actually grade, do not hold office hours, do no service, and put no effort into writing etc

the reason to go into academia is because you love research. there is basically no one whose main motivation to go into academia was to chill. at that point it would be much easier to just grind out a lucrative practice then retire early

[Anonymous User]

I'll say, as an adjunct in a non clinical course at a T3-T2 school in Middle USA:

Most of the newer faculty have sterling credentials (even moreso than the older folks). I'd say a quarter of the newer faculty have a PhD. I do not, but do have a masters and published a lot in a law adjacent field prior to going to law school, and have published etc in current field.
Most have clerked on either the state sup court or in dist fed +. Obviously, most had great grades.

Our school does have tenured clinical profs, but not a lot. It is hard to get tenured, and a lot of roles are filled by fellowship temp folks (may be exaggerating this a bit, but feel like there are more nowadays).

I enjoy teaching, but as an adjunct, I don't make very much. I do not think I will ever be tenured unless I somehow can continuously publish in top notch journals and would be willing to jump around to more schools/ do fellowships etc.

When you say don't make very much, are we talking 20k a year, 30k, 100k? If you dont feel comfortable being precise thats fine but I would like to know the range.

The adjuncts at my local (state) law school make around $3500-10,000 a year - it looks like for a number of them, it's $1750 per course. If you're a lecturer/instructor - more likely to be full time whereas adjunct is usually one course at a time - it looks like it ranges from $26-50k. (I picked a state school b/c generally state salaries have to be public so you can look this stuff up; I'd imagine HYS pay more.)

Re: tenure, yes, it's hard to get - not necessarily so much that lots of people are getting turned down at the tenure stage, but that it's hard to get on the tenure track to begin with, even at a T2-T3 in middle America. Someone else has already said this, but go to the school's website and look at the credentials of those who got hired most recently. I do think that as you go down the rankings, you see more schools hiring more of their alums, but I do think most of them are clinical or legal writing profs, not doctrinal.

Just to add another adjunct salary data point w/ ranges for anonymity:

I adjunct on the side (typically teach one 3-credit hour course each semester that is directly related to my biglaw practice area) at a law school ranked somewhere in top 30. Not an alum of the law school but practicing in same market. Pay has ranged from $2,000-3,000 per credit hour, so $6,000-$9,000 per semester. My all-in time commitment each semester likely averages out to ~10-15 hours/week now but was certainly higher whenever building out a course initially. I admit I have sometimes fallen into the "auto-pilot" trap at certain points during past semesters (especially when work is crazy), but for the most part, I do make an effort to continually improve my materials and teaching, provide students with detailed feedback, etc.

Overall, I think it is a great side gig if you have the time and enjoy teaching.

[johndooley]

john you are talking about the 75 year old professor who gives no fucks. that's not most professors who are below the age of 50. most people have to grind to get on the tenure track and continue grinding until they get tenure. then once they have tenure at age ~40 they slow down and it becomes maybe a 40 hr a week job. again this can be less if you decide to seriously slack but that's just not most professors who are non-geriatrics. it is absurd to think most professors do not actually grade, do not hold office hours, do no service, and put no effort into writing etc

Look I respect my old profs a lot and send them updates all the time. All are in retirement because the ABA sucks and shuts down schools with abandon. But they’re definitely not the most industrious lot. If I had to guess I’d say they averaged 20-30 hours a week of work, some pushed that 10 hour schedule I outlined. Most took a couple days to post grades, way too little time to do a decent job. Some came to class unprepared to lecture. A lot did the Poetry and Law style “research.” I think most people here are too enthralled by these fellowships and Yale and Harvard JDs. It’s just not that tough or special if you plan ahead.

[nixy]

john you are talking about the 75 year old professor who gives no fucks. that's not most professors who are below the age of 50. most people have to grind to get on the tenure track and continue grinding until they get tenure. then once they have tenure at age ~40 they slow down and it becomes maybe a 40 hr a week job. again this can be less if you decide to seriously slack but that's just not most professors who are non-geriatrics. it is absurd to think most professors do not actually grade, do not hold office hours, do no service, and put no effort into writing etc

Look I respect my old profs a lot and send them updates all the time. All are in retirement because the ABA sucks and shuts down schools with abandon. But they’re definitely not the most industrious lot. If I had to guess I’d say they averaged 20-30 hours a week of work, some pushed that 10 hour schedule I outlined. Most took a couple days to post grades, way too little time to do a decent job. Some came to class unprepared to lecture. A lot did the Poetry and Law style “research.” I think most people here are too enthralled by these fellowships and Yale and Harvard JDs. It’s just not that tough or special if you plan ahead.

Do you think that how much you believe the professors you knew at your now-closed school worked is representative of all of legal academia?

[JusticeJackson]

Do you think that how much you believe the professors you knew at your now-closed school worked is representative of all of legal academia?

This guy is too absurd to not be a troll but I think this is the best part of the troll.

“I think the professors were lazy at my diploma mill that was shut down because the students didn’t learn enough from classes to pass the bar. Therefore the professors at other schools must necessarily also be lazy, irrespective of the fact that those schools were not shut down because students there do learn enough from their classes to pass the bar.”

I really love it.

[crazywafflez]

My salary data range is comparable to the above posters; 1.5-3k per credit, I've taught both 2-3 credit courses. I promise, I don't do it for the money. And I've spent as much time on 2 credit courses as I have on 3 credit ones.
For courses I've built, I spent around 20 hours a week preparing etc.
For courses I already had a road map on, probs 10 hours a week.

It is hard to get tenured in general.
I'd say they certainly look at your writings. A lot of what is needed is churning out research (I'm not saying this is the right model, it is what it is).

Personally, I think it would behoove the schools to hire more and better teachers and folks with years of practical xp, but don't think that's gonna happen.

[johndooley]

john you are talking about the 75 year old professor who gives no fucks. that's not most professors who are below the age of 50. most people have to grind to get on the tenure track and continue grinding until they get tenure. then once they have tenure at age ~40 they slow down and it becomes maybe a 40 hr a week job. again this can be less if you decide to seriously slack but that's just not most professors who are non-geriatrics. it is absurd to think most professors do not actually grade, do not hold office hours, do no service, and put no effort into writing etc

Look I respect my old profs a lot and send them updates all the time. All are in retirement because the ABA sucks and shuts down schools with abandon. But they’re definitely not the most industrious lot. If I had to guess I’d say they averaged 20-30 hours a week of work, some pushed that 10 hour schedule I outlined. Most took a couple days to post grades, way too little time to do a decent job. Some came to class unprepared to lecture. A lot did the Poetry and Law style “research.” I think most people here are too enthralled by these fellowships and Yale and Harvard JDs. It’s just not that tough or special if you plan ahead.

Do you think that how much you believe the professors you knew at your now-closed school worked is representative of all of legal academia?

I think they worked harder than profs at most law schools.

[johndooley]

Do you think that how much you believe the professors you knew at your now-closed school worked is representative of all of legal academia?

This guy is too absurd to not be a troll but I think this is the best part of the troll.

“I think the professors were lazy at my diploma mill that was shut down because the students didn’t learn enough from classes to pass the bar. Therefore the professors at other schools must necessarily also be lazy, irrespective of the fact that those schools were not shut down because students there do learn enough from their classes to pass the bar.”

I really love it.

Bar passage wasn’t why it was shut down. Our rates were higher than many schools still standing with better job outcomes. Good schools also don’t teach to the bar. That’s for Stetson and Cooley Tampa.