Landing in Academia Forum

[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?

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

Based on your extensive experience working as a prof at multiple different law schools?

[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.

Based on your extensive experience working as a prof at multiple different law schools?

If you think you need to work as a professor at "multiple different" (great repetition) law schools to have an opinion on this then maybe you should not have one either. Many of you are infatuated with your old professors.

[Anonymous User]

To the poster who asked "is it hard to get tenured," the answer is "no." Law professors have one of, if not, the highest rate of attaining tenure in academia. I believe the rate is around 90% for those up for tenure. That being said, getting ON the tenure track is incredibly difficult, as other users have indicated. Dive into Lawsky's annual reports. Typically there are ~40-50 tenure-track hires per year across all the ABA law schools, and their profiles are just insane. The average profile looks like: T14 (but moreso HYS) with latin honors, law review editor, 2-3 publications in top 100 law journals, a PhD, 1 fellowship, 1 federal clerkship, and an additional paper ready/nearly ready to be published that is a job talk paper. In the background, these people have also cultivated references that are either making phone calls on their behalf or picking up the phone when called and saying good things about them. Many people with these credentials end up teaching at law schools you wouldn't have even imagined attending as a student.

I have a friend who actually landed a TT job at one of those 150-200 ranged law schools, taught two years, and then quit. She absolutely could not stand teaching and could not slog through the 10-30 hours of weekly prep getting her courses started or maintaining them. She did not want to hold office hours and deal with questions from students with 152 LSATs and 3.1 undergrad GPAs. She just wanted to sit inside, read esoteric law review articles and primary sources, and write about them. She now works at a think tank where she writes white papers and is infinitely happier.

[johndooley]

I have a friend who actually landed a TT job at one of those 150-200 ranged law schools, taught two years, and then quit. She absolutely could not stand teaching and could not slog through the 10-30 hours of weekly prep getting her courses started or maintaining them. She did not want to hold office hours and deal with questions from students with 152 LSATs and 3.1 undergrad GPAs. She just wanted to sit inside, read esoteric law review articles and primary sources, and write about them. She now works at a think tank where she writes white papers and is infinitely happier.

Not being able to slog through 10 hours of prep a week for a course you'd teach the same way until retirement is the epitome of lazy. She is obviously low EQ, there are ways to technically hold office hours but make it clear to students not to bother showing up, that it is a complete waste of time and you'd make them feel uncomfortable.

She sounds really boring, wanting to read esoteric articles. I can guarantee many of those 152 LSAT students will have more fulfilling and accomplished careers.

[nixy]

If you think you need to work as a professor at "multiple different" (great repetition) law schools to have an opinion on this then maybe you should not have one either. Many of you are infatuated with your old professors.

I mean, it helps to be familiar with what a job actually entails to comment on how much work it is.

One the problems that higher ed (collectively) faces is that people who attend college/university/grad school as a student think that what they see is all that the job entails, and that’s absolutely not true (especially if that person has never had to put together courses and be prepared to lecture/teach class multiple hours a week). It’s a really self-centered and limited understanding of what the job entails. It’s like thinking that all a doctor does is spend 10 minutes at a time with patients because that’s been your experience with them.

And no, I’m not infatuated with any of my old professors - I used to work in academia (at a number of schools) and know many academics (as friends and peers, not as their former student), so I know what the job actually entails. But nice ad hominem. I could turn around and suggest a professor must have fucked your girl, based on your take on them.

Anyway it’s truly stupid to keep engaging with you on this and I’m done now, but it’s hard when you just keep coming out with one insulting take after another. I guess that’s what makes you a successful troll.

[johndooley]

If you think you need to work as a professor at "multiple different" (great repetition) law schools to have an opinion on this then maybe you should not have one either. Many of you are infatuated with your old professors.

I mean, it helps to be familiar with what a job actually entails to comment on how much work it is.

One the problems that higher ed (collectively) faces is that people who attend college/university/grad school as a student think that what they see is all that the job entails, and that’s absolutely not true (especially if that person has never had to put together courses and be prepared to lecture/teach class multiple hours a week). It’s a really self-centered and limited understanding of what the job entails. It’s like thinking that all a doctor does is spend 10 minutes at a time with patients because that’s been your experience with them.

And no, I’m not infatuated with any of my old professors - I used to work in academia (at a number of schools) and know many academics (as friends and peers, not as their former student), so I know what the job actually entails. But nice ad hominem. I could turn around and suggest a professor must have fucked your girl, based on your take on them.

Anyway it’s truly stupid to keep engaging with you on this and I’m done now, but it’s hard when you just keep coming out with one insulting take after another. I guess that’s what makes you a successful troll.

As said before, I was a TA. Try paying attention. You are speculating on how I came to my conclusion in a free-wheeling, sloppy manner. That is one of the smallest issues facing academia if it is a real trend at all. Comparing professors to a medical doctor in any capacity, no matter how loose an analogy, is insulting to real professionals who add value.

Got it, so you never got tenure and the time and energy demands of the job ran you down. To save face, you build up what is required of professors whereas in reality it is not much at all. Or you were an overpaid admin, sort of like a waterboy, and idolized the professors you "supported."

Yea, some viagra-addicted 75 year-old professor whose biggest claim to fame was poking fatties at woodstock got with my girl(s). I guess the whole perverted academic trope is still going strong.

[Anonymous User]

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.

+1. Just wait until he starts telling you about how much his house is worth and how successful his med-mal firm is and how he got out of crypto at exactly the right time and how much money he has and how little he works. the part about attending a now-closed school is just A+ TTTrolling.

[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.

+1. Just wait until he starts telling you about how much his house is worth and how successful his med-mal firm is and how he got out of crypto at exactly the right time and how much money he has and how little he works. the part about attending a now-closed school is just A+ TTTrolling.

Why would I discuss my house or crypto here? You’re reading into this way too much. People discuss personal finances and their career on this forum. You just didn’t like what you heard.

[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.

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.

I disagree. In one of my first classes a student asked a very well considered question about a random footnote in our reading that said something counterintuitive. He was clearly trying to do some mental reps to figure out how the law applied, and this footnote didn't jive. I hadn't focused on the footnote when I was preparing, and I frankly didn't know the answer. I could have blown the student off or given some BS socratic answer, where I turned the table on him. That's what I would've done if I wanted to be like one of the "full of it" professors you reference. But who would've learned from that? Absolutely no one. So after that class I researched the issue, I was able to reconcile it with the other aspects of the law that we were learning about, and I made sure to work it in during my next lecture. I really think that it was my obligation to actually teach these students, both to prepare them for the bar and to prepare them for life. I have since heard from the school's bar prep teacher that my students came into bar prep super well prepared. The Dean of the school called me after reading my reviews and asked me to come back and teach again. That was rewarding, and exactly why I wanted to take time out of my life to teach. Not to be "full of it" and "riff." Any worthless bum can do that.

[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.

I disagree. In one of my first classes a student asked a very well considered question about a random footnote in our reading that said something counterintuitive. He was clearly trying to do some mental reps to figure out how the law applied, and this footnote didn't jive. I hadn't focused on the footnote when I was preparing, and I frankly didn't know the answer. I could have blown the student off or given some BS socratic answer, where I turned the table on him. That's what I would've done if I wanted to be like one of the "full of it" professors you reference. But who would've learned from that? Absolutely no one. So after that class I researched the issue, I was able to reconcile it with the other aspects of the law that we were learning about, and I made sure to work it in during my next lecture. I really think that it was my obligation to actually teach these students, both to prepare them for the bar and to prepare them for life. I have since heard from the school's bar prep teacher that my students came into bar prep super well prepared. The Dean of the school called me after reading my reviews and asked me to come back and teach again. That was rewarding, and exactly why I wanted to take time out of my life to teach. Not to be "full of it" and "riff." Any worthless bum can do that.

Okay. You're basically ripping off the screenplay of "Stand and Deliver" but whatever. We are not necessarily disagreeing. I did not say every professor is some deadbeat. I said it is an undemanding job, that you can do practically nothing if you so choose (and many do so choose), and that it is well-compensated for its demands. This was your choice to teach well, good on you. That said, you did not have tenure so the calculus on whether to do a fine job or not is markedly different.

[jotarokujo]

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.

I disagree. In one of my first classes a student asked a very well considered question about a random footnote in our reading that said something counterintuitive. He was clearly trying to do some mental reps to figure out how the law applied, and this footnote didn't jive. I hadn't focused on the footnote when I was preparing, and I frankly didn't know the answer. I could have blown the student off or given some BS socratic answer, where I turned the table on him. That's what I would've done if I wanted to be like one of the "full of it" professors you reference. But who would've learned from that? Absolutely no one. So after that class I researched the issue, I was able to reconcile it with the other aspects of the law that we were learning about, and I made sure to work it in during my next lecture. I really think that it was my obligation to actually teach these students, both to prepare them for the bar and to prepare them for life. I have since heard from the school's bar prep teacher that my students came into bar prep super well prepared. The Dean of the school called me after reading my reviews and asked me to come back and teach again. That was rewarding, and exactly why I wanted to take time out of my life to teach. Not to be "full of it" and "riff." Any worthless bum can do that.

Okay. You're basically ripping off the screenplay of "Stand and Deliver" but whatever. We are not necessarily disagreeing. I did not say every professor is some deadbeat. I said it is an undemanding job, that you can do practically nothing if you so choose (and many do so choose), and that it is well-compensated for its demands. This was your choice to teach well, good on you. That said, you did not have tenure so the calculus on whether to do a fine job or not is markedly different.

i think it was mentioned before but yeah most white collar jobs can be coasted on in certain circumstances. this includes biglaw, just half ass everything as it takes like more than a year to be fired and keep lateralling. in that sense many many jobs are "undemanding...if you so choose". but lets look at the actual median of what people do in these jobs, that's what people look at when they call something demanding or undemanding, not the extreme coasters

[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.

I disagree. In one of my first classes a student asked a very well considered question about a random footnote in our reading that said something counterintuitive. He was clearly trying to do some mental reps to figure out how the law applied, and this footnote didn't jive. I hadn't focused on the footnote when I was preparing, and I frankly didn't know the answer. I could have blown the student off or given some BS socratic answer, where I turned the table on him. That's what I would've done if I wanted to be like one of the "full of it" professors you reference. But who would've learned from that? Absolutely no one. So after that class I researched the issue, I was able to reconcile it with the other aspects of the law that we were learning about, and I made sure to work it in during my next lecture. I really think that it was my obligation to actually teach these students, both to prepare them for the bar and to prepare them for life. I have since heard from the school's bar prep teacher that my students came into bar prep super well prepared. The Dean of the school called me after reading my reviews and asked me to come back and teach again. That was rewarding, and exactly why I wanted to take time out of my life to teach. Not to be "full of it" and "riff." Any worthless bum can do that.

Okay. You're basically ripping off the screenplay of "Stand and Deliver" but whatever. We are not necessarily disagreeing. I did not say every professor is some deadbeat. I said it is an undemanding job, that you can do practically nothing if you so choose (and many do so choose), and that it is well-compensated for its demands. This was your choice to teach well, good on you. That said, you did not have tenure so the calculus on whether to do a fine job or not is markedly different.

i think it was mentioned before but yeah most white collar jobs can be coasted on in certain circumstances. this includes biglaw, just half ass everything as it takes like more than a year to be fired and keep lateralling. in that sense many many jobs are "undemanding...if you so choose". but lets look at the actual median of what people do in these jobs, that's what people look at when they call something demanding or undemanding, not the extreme coasters

Not too sure on this. Bankers, traders, and medical residents would get canned in an instant if they pulled a tenth of what law professors do. The actual median? Big law attorneys, medmal attorneys, bankers, traders, and medical residents all work way harder than any tenure track professor. It is undemanding. Furthermore any law firm that allows what you are describing is poorly run. I would fire and probably sue my associate for damages if they tried this, and probably pursue a complaint with the FL bar.