Does anyone know if any of the LL.M. programs designed for people interested in becoming law professors are worth pursuing. I graduated from a T1 law school ranked somewhere between 20-40. I graduated in the top 5% of my class, has an executive position on the Law Review Board, participated in the National Moot Court Competition (not sure that really matters), and received several highly competitive academic awards/fellowships. During law school, I published a note and a comment in my school's law review and an article in a law journal at another law school. Since graduating, I have clerked at a state supreme court and a federal court of appeals. I have also published another article in a law review at a law school I did not attend.
Although I have done everything I could to increase my chances of getting a teaching gig, I realize it is extremely difficult to become a law professor when you don't attend a T14 law school. I'm curious if it would be worth applying to a teaching LL.M. program to help improve my chances of finding a position. If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to hear them.
LL.M. for Teaching?? Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
fanmingrui
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:59 pm
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
Ib4 llm flowchart.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
I was hoping for something a little more helpful than that
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
teaching jobs aren't cookie-cutter like biglaw firms, and most professors don't have LLMs. You didn't go to Chicago, Harvard or Yale, and I assume you don't have a PhD. If you don't want to do clinical/legal writing, that puts your chances at approximately nothing, give or take a few longshot placements. Like almost every other job, an LLM is unlikely to help. Still, if you are either naïve or just an optimist, apply to teaching fellowships instead--there are a number designed for people trying to break into academia.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
MrPapagiorgio
- Posts: 1740
- Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:36 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
You asked, I delivered.fanmingrui wrote:Ib4 llm flowchart.
But seriously, this is pretty on point:
Anonymous User wrote:teaching jobs aren't cookie-cutter like biglaw firms, and most professors don't have LLMs. You didn't go to Chicago, Harvard or Yale, and I assume you don't have a PhD. If you don't want to do clinical/legal writing, that puts your chances at approximately nothing, give or take a few longshot placements. Like almost every other job, an LLM is unlikely to help. Still, if you are either naïve or just an optimist, apply to teaching fellowships instead--there are a number designed for people trying to break into academia.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
Even this is a little misleading. I'll set Yale aside, because its academic hiring statistics are phenomenal, but I lack firsthand knowledge.You didn't go to Chicago, Harvard or Yale
With respect to Harvard and Chicago (and Stanford, for that matter), here's the academic hiring scale:
Top 1% with Supreme Court clerkship: You're golden.
Top 5% with more prestigious COA clerkship: You're probably good, but will need to work for a few years at a top firm and publish a top 100 law review article.
Top 10% with a less prestigious COA clerkship: Starts to get a little dicey. You'll now need a couple of years of elite firm experience, probably two well-placed articles, and possibly even a PhD, fellowship or VAP position (depending on your field).
Top 20% with only a DC clerkship: Now it becomes an uphill battle. You'll need to publish a third and possibly fourth article to make up for your deficient academic background. A fellowship, VAP or PhD becomes almost a must at this point -- it's the only way to "prove" that you're serious about academia. If you have extensive experience that relates to an underserved field (property, UCC, bankruptcy, maybe tax, maybe health, maybe IP), then you've got a fighting chance. Otherwise, you've got to write your way into academia, which is difficult and time-consuming -- oh, and there's an age bias, so don't take too long doing it.
(I know this all from personal experience.)
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
Do you think CSM has a distinct advantage over Skadden for your "elite firm requirement"? I know this is a random question, but it is relevant to my interests at the moment...Anonymous User wrote:Even this is a little misleading. I'll set Yale aside, because its academic hiring statistics are phenomenal, but I lack firsthand knowledge.You didn't go to Chicago, Harvard or Yale
With respect to Harvard and Chicago (and Stanford, for that matter), here's the academic hiring scale:
Top 1% with Supreme Court clerkship: You're golden.
Top 5% with more prestigious COA clerkship: You're probably good, but will need to work for a few years at a top firm and publish a top 100 law review article.
Top 10% with a less prestigious COA clerkship: Starts to get a little dicey. You'll now need a couple of years of elite firm experience, probably two well-placed articles, and possibly even a PhD, fellowship or VAP position (depending on your field).
Top 20% with only a DC clerkship: Now it becomes an uphill battle. You'll need to publish a third and possibly fourth article to make up for your deficient academic background. A fellowship, VAP or PhD becomes almost a must at this point -- it's the only way to "prove" that you're serious about academia. If you have extensive experience that relates to an underserved field (property, UCC, bankruptcy, maybe tax, maybe health, maybe IP), then you've got a fighting chance. Otherwise, you've got to write your way into academia, which is difficult and time-consuming -- oh, and there's an age bias, so don't take too long doing it.
(I know this all from personal experience.)
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 431123
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: LL.M. for Teaching??
Doesn't really matter. As long as it's V20 or so, it's all the same, subject to two caveats.Do you think CSM has a distinct advantage over Skadden for your "elite firm requirement"?
Caveat 1: If you want to teach in a specialized field and work for a firm that has a sterling reputation in that field, it will help. So working at Weil if you want to be a bankruptcy prof might be a boost over working at a more prestigious firm like Cravath without that field-specific connection. Ditto (to a lesser degree) Skadden Wilmington for corporate law.
Caveat 2: All bets are off if you are in a super-selective appellate group at a tip-top firm (W&C, Mayer, Gibson DC, Wilmer, etc.). This will definitely help, especially in the top 100 or so schools. BUT, if you are in a super-selective appellate group at a tip-top firm, your credentials are probably such that you don't need the boost.
