newrad wrote:Toodle-loo wrote:newrad wrote:Toodle-loo wrote:Hi all.
Long time lurker here coming out of the woods to ask opinions. I was reading the UMich c/o 2018 forum and noticed that a lot of people were really concerned with Michigan's jobs stats released last March, to the extent that some people withdrew immediately and some appeared to eat their deposits and attend elsewhere or reapply next cycle.
I haven't seen as much concern on this thread or the Michigan law c/o 2019 thread (where I'll be cross-posting this question), but I'm curious if you all share this concern or think it's unfounded.
(CTT I've read several of your recent posts and you seem to articulate that it's not at all a worry - do you have any additional thoughts on the issue?)
The c/o 2014 stats were a lot better.
The c/o 2014 stats were exactly the stats released last March that the people in the c/o 2018 forum were concerned about...
Really? 2014 had a noticably higher employment score and noticably lower under-employment score from LST than 2013 or any recent year, really.
There was a stretch when the numbers were just bad. They've improved, and they're going to get better still. The problem, for Michigan, is that the employment data is basically 2.5 years behind. Firms and highly selected judges hire the summer after your 1L year, but the data doesn't come out until the spring after you graduate.
There's a pretty robust demand for Michigan grads. However, during the recession the school took its enrollment towards 400 / class. The entering class this fall was 267. The 2014 data is for a class of 390 graduates. It's also for a class that was on the old punitive grade curve. The class of 2016 was the first one to have the benefit of the new curve and a lower class size (~320). The data that are released in a year and a bit will reflect what we've all known since the summer of 2014: things got a ton better.
In terms of the market for Michigan grads: Basically, you've got a bunch of midsize firms that are focused on maintaining the connection to Michigan and getting a few Michigan grads, and they're not varying that a ton depending on whether the class is 400 or 250. Then you've got the big firms with which we were struggling prior to the class of 2016 because other schools had these easy grade curves and we were stuck on something else. Then you've got federal judges who are especially keen to higher Michigan graduates (lots of alums) and the demand from that group isn't really changing based on class size either. Then there are judges who don't have strong school preferences and the performance with them is helped by the GPA thing. The combination of reducing the class size by 33 percent and boosting the grade curve to be competitive with peer schools made a huge difference.
On a related note, I know some 3Ls who are still searching for jobs. In every case, it makes sense in some way. They fall into three groups: (A) The public interest people who are lining up jobs as we speak, cause that's how that market works. (B) A couple people I simply wouldn't want working for me and who, I suspect, fail to hide their complete and utter lack of professionalism in interviews. (C) The unlucky couple students who are super awkward but are actually smart, decent people. If you're the sort of person people will want to solve their problems and you're not super--and I mean SUPER--awkward, Michigan is going to work out just fine.
As far as how the 2014 data look:
Michigan:
90.3 percent employment vs 5.6 percent underemployment.
Obviously that's not the 100 percent we would like, but it's better than Northwestern (81.1 percent score), Duke (90.2 percent score), and Georgetown (79.7 percent score).
