Top Law Schools

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

VegasLaw702 wrote:

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

Spot on. Female attorneys will have a harder time advancing, because they usually aren't as competent as their male counterparts when it comes to practicing law. While they generally share equal representation in law schools (and in some cases number more than males), you rarely find very many of them making partner and advancing very far.

TheBiggerMediocre wrote:Alright I can see a number of these possibilities playing out. But it seems to me as if women are regarded equally but would rather no take on the responsibility of being partner.

dkb17xzx wrote:

VegasLaw702 wrote:

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

Spot on. Female attorneys will have a harder time advancing, because they usually aren't as competent as their male counterparts when it comes to practicing law. While they generally share equal representation in law schools (and in some cases number more than males), you rarely find very many of them making partner and advancing very far.

this is gonna get interesting.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Keep in mind the OP once suggested law schools should admit only men, so.... (although that doesn't explain VegasLaw's idiocy).

rinkrat19 wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Keep in mind the OP once suggested law schools should admit only men, so.... (although that doesn't explain VegasLaw's idiocy).

Vegas seems to have rephrased himself.

OP is lame, ty for the warning. I shall not engage.

VegasLaw702 wrote:

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

Spot on. Female attorneys will have a harder time advancing, and their lack of advancement might signal that they are perceived as being not as competent as their male counterparts when it comes to practicing law. Which doesn't make sense, since they generally share equal representation in law schools (and in some cases number more than males), but you rarely find very many of them making partner and advancing very far.

Edited for clarification.

Tekrul wrote:fairly long post

Tekrul wrote:

VegasLaw702 wrote:

twentypercentmore wrote:Not necessarily relevent to your question, but I'd think a "glass ceiling" of sorts is a lot more likely to exist at the 3-4 year associate mark (i.e, retention) than at the hiring level.

Spot on. Female attorneys will have a harder time advancing, and their lack of advancement might signal that they are perceived as being not as competent as their male counterparts when it comes to practicing law. Which doesn't make sense, since they generally share equal representation in law schools (and in some cases number more than males), but you rarely find very many of them making partner and advancing very far.

Edited for clarification.

Part of this reason may fall into an anomaly particular to the legal education or legal work, amongst other select fields.

Across the board in most types of universities, women outperform men in class and achieve higher grades and more departmental honors. However, it should be noted that grades at a college are often made up of frequent "checks". Short papers, problem sets, quizzes, and midterms. This lends itself to the diligence and lesser degree of socialization that women have statistically reported at universities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/educa ... wanted=all


However, law school is one of those few types of school where men vastly outperform women. Many have attributed it to the adversarial type of learning that the Socratic Method exemplifies; perhaps women do not respond to this type of learning. Others have called into question factors such as the fact that men outperform women on the SAT. When the entire grade comes down to 1 four hour exam, much like the SAT, the high stakes pressure and the nature of law school not having any of college's "checks" seems not to speak to women. Still more look to the trend that men outperform women in math and science related courses. As these courses lend themselves to logical/analytical ability much as law does, perhaps there is a relation there.
http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/jlsj/vol33/iss1/3/

I have included sources here because I have brought up a salient issue.

This is a problem that law schools have been aware of for almost 20 years. I can say confidently that it is a topic of debate at many law schools and the ABA but no one is quite sure of the actual reason why this is the case so change has been slow just because they don't know quite what to change.

So as far as gender discrepancy goes in employment and advancement - it may seem to heavily favor men, and perhaps the lifestyle of a law firm associate or the self selection of women to leave the work force plays a role, but the discrepancy starts early and begins at the school.

Edit: Sigh! This was a troll? Thanks for wasting my time and making me heated about an actual problem, idiot.

Employment by Gender the

rad lulz wrote:

Employment by Gender the

lol

oaken wrote:

rad lulz wrote:

Employment by Gender the

lol