Top Law Schools

If anyone is awake, that is.

1) Can you give me a short list of fatal mistakes students make when taking exams?

2) To brief or not to brief?

3) What are the best hornbooks, etc?

How difficult do/did you find the tenure process?

PDaddy wrote:1) Can you give me a short list of fatal mistakes students make when taking exams?

2) To brief or not to brief?

3) What are the best hornbooks, etc?

1. Assuming away the issue.

2. I thought briefing was a waste of time when I was a 1L, and I did quite well. But I know people who briefed and who also did quite well. Do what works for you. In a statutory or rules based course, then briefs are typically less important.

3. Depends on your prof, but I always liked the classics (Glannon on Civpro, Chemerinsky on Conlaw). The best supplement usually comes down to prof; if your torts prof is all about law and econ, then of course go out and get the posner hornbook.

voice of reason wrote:How difficult do/did you find the tenure process?

I'll let you know in a couple of years. My general understanding is that the standard for tenure is fairly low, vis a vis other disciplines. The absolute hardest part is getting in the door.

How did you prep your job talk? How did it go (aside from obviously being good enough, since you got the job)?

voice of reason wrote:How did you prep your job talk? How did it go (aside from obviously being good enough, since you got the job)?

Practiced with friends who were lawyers. Did one practice session with profs at my alma mater. Got lots of info.

It was fun. I liked talking about a paper that I truly enjoyed. I should note, though, that my interviewing was through somewhat unconventional means (I didn't technically do the meat market). If you really want to be a prof, you will relish the opportunity to discuss your ideas with others -- it's rare that so many smart people will take such a strong interest in what YOU think.

Are you satisfied with the extent to which your students are intellectually engaged with the subject matter? As a refugee from academia, I've been wondering whether the supreme importance of GPA tends to push philosophical discussions to the margins.

Also, can you give us a rough idea of where your school is ranked?

dogmatic slumber wrote:Are you satisfied with the extent to which your students are intellectually engaged with the subject matter? As a refugee from academia, I've been wondering whether the supreme importance of GPA tends to push philosophical discussions to the margins.

Also, can you give us a rough idea of where your school is ranked?

Some students are interested, some aren't. I think most (if not all) students in my class are entirely unfamiliar with the subject matter, so the important thing is for them to learn. So, I don't care too much about their "intellectual engage[ment]" with the subject matter -- I just want them to learn the basics. If and when I teach a small seminar class, I may develop different views.

I teach at a top 50ish school.

Have you tried diphenhydramine?

LawProfessor123 wrote:

dogmatic slumber wrote:Are you satisfied with the extent to which your students are intellectually engaged with the subject matter? As a refugee from academia, I've been wondering whether the supreme importance of GPA tends to push philosophical discussions to the margins.

Also, can you give us a rough idea of where your school is ranked?

Some students are interested, some aren't. I think most (if not all) students in my class are entirely unfamiliar with the subject matter, so the important thing is for them to learn. So, I don't care too much about their "intellectual engage[ment]" with the subject matter -- I just want them to learn the basics. If and when I teach a small seminar class, I may develop different views.

I teach at a top 50ish school.

Fair enough. I guess you have your colleagues for that too. Thanks for the reply.

1)What´s your opinion of legal writing instructors? Do you consider them your colleagues?

2) Can you tell before the exam where students are going to fall, generally?

3) Do professors typically look at who did well and who did poorly after the fact or talk about students at the top of the class with other professors?

4) What is on your mind if a top student asks you for a transfer LOR?

Additionally, I've been wondering this for a while - are professors receptive to talking to students who simply want to discuss ideologies or pick a professor's brain on a certain subject? I know each professor probably varies, but is it generally scorned to meet with a professor even if one isn't having trouble in their class?

artichoke88 wrote:Additionally, I've been wondering this for a while - are professors receptive to talking to students who simply want to discuss ideologies or pick a professor's brain on a certain subject? I know each professor probably varies, but is it generally scorned to meet with a professor even if one isn't having trouble in their class?

I'd love to meet with such a person. Professors generally have devoted their lives to a subject matter that most people don't care about. If you are interested in the area too, that's awesome.

In my experience, older professors who already have their followers or who scorn students might react differently, but professors 5-15 years out of law school generally will be excited to chat with you.

Okay, one more: What were you doing before, and what made you decide to go back to academia?

LawProfessor123 wrote:

artichoke88 wrote:Additionally, I've been wondering this for a while - are professors receptive to talking to students who simply want to discuss ideologies or pick a professor's brain on a certain subject? I know each professor probably varies, but is it generally scorned to meet with a professor even if one isn't having trouble in their class?

I'd love to meet with such a person. Professors generally have devoted their lives to a subject matter that most people don't care about. If you are interested in the area too, that's awesome.

In my experience, older professors who already have their followers or who scorn students might react differently, but professors 5-15 years out of law school generally will be excited to chat with you.

Great to hear, I can't wait to get to law school and discuss issues with people much more knowledgeable than I am!

dogmatic slumber wrote:Okay, one more: What were you doing before, and what made you decide to go back to academia?

I practiced law and enjoyed it. However, I wanted to be able to write about things that I wanted to write about.

And I wanted summers off .

LawProfessor123 wrote:

dogmatic slumber wrote:Okay, one more: What were you doing before, and what made you decide to go back to academia?

I practiced law and enjoyed it. However, I wanted to be able to write about things that I wanted to write about.

And I wanted summers off .

Yup. Good work if you can get it.

Alright, this might be a stupid question, but I'm worried about sexual misconduct from (male) law professors towards their female students. My gut feeling tells me this kind of behavior is prolific, but I really have no evidence for that so I would like to get your input. Have you ever heard or had to deal with situations like this at the school where you lecture?

voice of reason wrote:How did you prep your job talk? How did it go (aside from obviously being good enough, since you got the job)?

Is your av a Spock/Obama hybrid? If so... why?

LawProfessor123 wrote:3. Depends on your prof, but I always liked the classics (Glannon on Civpro, Chemerinsky on Conlaw). The best supplement usually comes down to prof; if your torts prof is all about law and econ, then of course go out and get the posner hornbook.

LOL at Glannon being the "classic" for Civ Pro. Friedenthal, Kane, and Miller would cry.

If I want to be a law prof, what is better: finishing near the top of my T15 - T 20 school or transferring to a better school after 1L?

artichoke88 wrote:Alright, this might be a stupid question, but I'm worried about sexual misconduct from (male) law professors towards their female students. My gut feeling tells me this kind of behavior is prolific, but I really have no evidence for that so I would like to get your input. Have you ever heard or had to deal with situations like this at the school where you lecture?

I think every school has at least one scandalous story in its past. I'm 100% certain that this behavior is not prolific, though. But it has happened - take a look at the allegations regarding the former Boalt dean, for example.

MURPH wrote:If I want to be a law prof, what is better: finishing near the top of my T15 - T 20 school or transferring to a better school after 1L?

Transfer, not even a close question. Law school hiring committees are extremely (and perhaps unjustifiably) snobby regarding your JD school.

I'm around for a little bit, at this ungodly hour.