Top Law Schools

From --LinkRemoved--

Just the preliminary results.

Y 4
H 13
S 7
Col 3
Chi 3
NYU 11
V 4
M 0
P 2
B 2
D 1
C 1
N 2
G 10

45/80 hires (56%) had clerkships.
57/80 hires (71%) had fellowships / VAPs.

twistedwrister wrote:From --LinkRemoved--

Just the preliminary results.

Y 4
H 13
S 7
Col 3
Chi 3
NYU 11
V 4
M 0
P 2
B 2
D 1
C 1
N 2
G 10

45/80 hires (56%) had clerkships.
57/80 hires (71%) had fellowships / VAPs.

Is this in indicator of some weird competence of GULC to place profs or just a result of having so many more students then anyone else?

LawIdiot86 wrote:

twistedwrister wrote:From --LinkRemoved--

Just the preliminary results.

Y 4
H 13
S 7
Col 3
Chi 3
NYU 11
V 4
M 0
P 2
B 2
D 1
C 1
N 2
G 10

45/80 hires (56%) had clerkships.
57/80 hires (71%) had fellowships / VAPs.

Is this in indicator of some weird competence of GULC to place profs or just a result of having so many more students then anyone else?

Not a perfect analysis, but for the preliminary results, if you divide by class size:

Y 2%
H 2.3%
S 3.9%
Col 0.7%
Chi 1.5%
NYU 2.4%
V 1.1%
M 0%
P 0.8%
B 0.8%
D 0.5%
C 0.5%
N 0.8%
G 2.1% (1.7% if you include PT enrollment)

LawIdiot86 wrote:

twistedwrister wrote:From --LinkRemoved--

Just the preliminary results.

Y 4
H 13
S 7
Col 3
Chi 3
NYU 11
V 4
M 0
P 2
B 2
D 1
C 1
N 2
G 10

45/80 hires (56%) had clerkships.
57/80 hires (71%) had fellowships / VAPs.

Is this in indicator of some weird competence of GULC to place profs or just a result of having so many more students then anyone else?

Percentages help context, like poster above provided, but so does knowing that there is going to be a lot of volatility to these results from year to year. A good example: UT has placed 2 so far and Michigan has placed 0 so far. By no means should that be used to show UT is better placing at people in academia than Michigan.

Anyone want to try to do a 3 year or 5 year average for this?

On an unrelated note, what's the overlap like with people who have clerkship and people who have VAPs? E.g., is it either-or (if you don't have one you better have the other), or is it largely the same group of people? Are those who get jobs without a clerkship mostly PhDs?

Percentages certainly help. If we could also see how many people from each school applied, compared with how many actually got positions, we'd really be working with something.

TemporarySaint wrote:Percentages certainly help. If we could also see how many people from each school applied, compared with how many actually got positions, we'd really be working with something.

This data is basically impossible to compile. The only way this could be done is if AALS started doing this every year in D.C.

Are those who get jobs without a clerkship mostly PhDs?

The non-clerks are generally PhDs, tax people (most with LLMs), clinical people or foreign hires. You get a handful of domestic non-clerk, non-PhD, non-tax, non-clinical people every year, but it's usually pretty small -- like 10 or so (out of 100+) new hires.

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

TemporarySaint wrote:Percentages certainly help. If we could also see how many people from each school applied, compared with how many actually got positions, we'd really be working with something.

This data is basically impossible to compile. The only way this could be done is if AALS started doing this every year in D.C.

We have this data at least for the t14 in 2011.

Anonymous User wrote:

Are those who get jobs without a clerkship mostly PhDs?

The non-clerks are generally PhDs, tax people (most with LLMs), clinical people or foreign hires. You get a handful of domestic non-clerk, non-PhD, non-tax, non-clinical people every year, but it's usually pretty small -- like 10 or so (out of 100+) new hires.

Could this explain GULC's over-representation? Their huge tax LLM program and massive LLM program in general is loaded with foreign students.

TemporarySaint wrote:

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

TemporarySaint wrote:Percentages certainly help. If we could also see how many people from each school applied, compared with how many actually got positions, we'd really be working with something.

This data is basically impossible to compile. The only way this could be done is if AALS started doing this every year in D.C.

We have this data at least for the t14 in 2011.

Link?

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

TemporarySaint wrote:

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

TemporarySaint wrote:Percentages certainly help. If we could also see how many people from each school applied, compared with how many actually got positions, we'd really be working with something.

This data is basically impossible to compile. The only way this could be done is if AALS started doing this every year in D.C.

We have this data at least for the t14 in 2011.

Link?

Sorry I was wrong on the year (not sure if 2011 data is available) but here's 06-08 http://www.concurringopinions.com/archi ... iring.html

TemporarySaint wrote:

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:

TemporarySaint wrote:

Richie Tenenbaum wrote: This data is basically impossible to compile. The only way this could be done is if AALS started doing this every year in D.C.

We have this data at least for the t14 in 2011.

Link?

Sorry I was wrong on the year (not sure if 2011 data is available) but here's 06-08 http://www.concurringopinions.com/archi ... iring.html

Wow, this is great stuff; sorry for being a doubter.