Going to Law School to Teach Forum

[Richie Tenenbaum]

What this thread has become:

--ImageRemoved--

[aliarrow]

What this thread has become:

facepalm.jpg

[Richie Tenenbaum]

What this thread has been:

facepalm.jpg

Better?

[vamedic03]

I know two law professors in my personal life. They both teach at a T50 law school. I asked about the best way to get into academia and I was given very divergent answers. One of them went GULC JD, Clerkship, Big Law, Small Private Practice, Academia while the other went Columbia JD, Appellate Clerkship, LLM, Academia.

However, they both agreed that I should not go to the school they currently teach at if I ever wanted a shot at acdemia. They basically said to aim for the T14 and HYS if possible in order to get into academia.

Is academia or are prestigious clerkships closed of to T30 students? I'll be attending UNC in the fall and I foresee myself trying to get a clerkship at some point, but obviously I don't know much about all of this yet.

For 95-99% of T30 students, yes.

[DeeCee]

I know two law professors in my personal life. They both teach at a T50 law school. I asked about the best way to get into academia and I was given very divergent answers. One of them went GULC JD, Clerkship, Big Law, Small Private Practice, Academia while the other went Columbia JD, Appellate Clerkship, LLM, Academia.

However, they both agreed that I should not go to the school they currently teach at if I ever wanted a shot at acdemia. They basically said to aim for the T14 and HYS if possible in order to get into academia.

Is academia or are prestigious clerkships closed of to T30 students? I'll be attending UNC in the fall and I foresee myself trying to get a clerkship at some point, but obviously I don't know much about all of this yet.

For 95-99% of T30 students, yes.

OK, so when 9% of students in the UNC c/o 2009 employment stats are listed as having a "judicial clerkship," this means any kind of clerkship, correct?

The reason I ask is because although a prestigious clerkship would be nice, it is not required. I would be happy working in NC for several years.

ETA: also, your numbers correlate with academia. On their employment stats sheet it lists just 1% of grads being employed in academia. However, that's a side note as I am not interested in that

[aliarrow]

OK, so when 9% of students in the UNC c/o 2009 employment stats are listed as having a "judicial clerkship," this means any kind of clerkship, correct?

The reason I ask is because although a prestigious clerkship would be nice, it is not required. I would be happy working in NC for several years.

9% went to clerkships overall.
5% were Article III
4% were non-Article III

[DeeCee]

OK, so when 9% of students in the UNC c/o 2009 employment stats are listed as having a "judicial clerkship," this means any kind of clerkship, correct?

The reason I ask is because although a prestigious clerkship would be nice, it is not required. I would be happy working in NC for several years.

9% went to clerkships overall.
5% were Article III
4% were non-Article III

Thanks! Forgot about your awesome lawschoolpicker.com skillz

[aliarrow]

OK, so when 9% of students in the UNC c/o 2009 employment stats are listed as having a "judicial clerkship," this means any kind of clerkship, correct?

The reason I ask is because although a prestigious clerkship would be nice, it is not required. I would be happy working in NC for several years.

9% went to clerkships overall.
5% were Article III
4% were non-Article III

Thanks! Forgot about your awesome lawschoolpicker.com willingness to be the only one on here to shell out $20 for a US News Subscription skillz

[firemed]

Point well taken: my tone in the earlier post was over the top, and for that, I apologize. The underlying message, however, remains. People really just should not opine on things they don't know about, or speculate based on only a tiny amount of information. In short, people shouldn't post guesses. It confuses people who don't know any better and detracts from the overall focus of the conversation.

This is not to say that people who don't know much about a subject, or who want to learn about a subject, cannot participate in the dialogue. They clearly can, but by asking questions instead of making declaratory statements. So to the extent you are looking to educate yourself by these threads, firemed, I completely understand your goal. The way you go about doing that is important, though, just as the way I or others answer questions is as well.

Fair enough. I won't post wild guesses anymore... and will try to make my opinions and guesses much more clear and not at all declaratory. I apologize for being wrong and making it sound like it was somehow more than a guess.

ETA: I should've just said "I have heard blah blah blah... but I don't know. Can anyone in the know fill us in whether this is correct or not?" right from the start. That would've saved a bunch of stupid...

And apology accepted re: tone.

We good now, bro? (offers fist bump)

[aliarrow]

Point well taken: my tone in the earlier post was over the top, and for that, I apologize. The underlying message, however, remains. People really just should not opine on things they don't know about, or speculate based on only a tiny amount of information. In short, people shouldn't post guesses. It confuses people who don't know any better and detracts from the overall focus of the conversation.

This is not to say that people who don't know much about a subject, or who want to learn about a subject, cannot participate in the dialogue. They clearly can, but by asking questions instead of making declaratory statements. So to the extent you are looking to educate yourself by these threads, firemed, I completely understand your goal. The way you go about doing that is important, though, just as the way I or others answer questions is as well.

The thing is there are relatively few who are truly informed about things such as prestigious clerkships and judiciary matters (you being the primary source to my knowledge), and you can't be everywhere at once to provide correct information. So we do take it upon ourselves to speculate in a discussion format. He wasn't posting as fact but as a mere guess, which is what the majority of posts on TLS are anyways (however many others do it in a more matter-of-fact manner). So the frustration is understandable, but at the same time you can't really blame firemed for just giving an opinion.

I'd even venture to guess 2Ls and 3Ls speculating on legal employment trajectories (what comes after biglaw, becoming a partner, transitioning to business, etc) has virtually the same amount of credibility as firemed speculating on How to Become a Judge.

[notanumber]

Hey GTL. This is veering a bit off topic, but I imagine that it's relevant to a few of us aspiring professors who are reading this thread and you seem to have a pretty good grasp on the whole federal clerkship process.

In general does having an advanced degree in a subject not directly related to law help or hurt applicants? I imagine that it varies by judge, but do you think it would be a net positive or a net negative? Are there any steps that one can take in law school to hedge against any potential negatives?

[DeeCee]

Hey GTL. This is veering a bit off topic, but I imagine that it's relevant to a few of us aspiring professors who are reading this thread and you seem to have a pretty good grasp on the whole federal clerkship process.

In general does having an advanced degree in a subject not directly related to law help or hurt applicants? I imagine that it varies by judge, but do you think it would be a net positive or a net negative? Are there any steps that one can take in law school to hedge against any potential negatives?

+1, I'd like to know as well.

[firemed]

We good now, bro? (offers fist bump)

--ImageRemoved--