October 21, 2015

How Long After "Meat Market" Before Candidates Hear from Schools?


A rookie job seeker writes:

A question about the law teaching market, which I suspect will be of interest to a number of candidates who read your Law School Reports blog:  When can we expect to hear from hiring committees we spoke with at AALS?  Do the better schools tend to wait longer to make their calls?  And do schools tend to notify candidates that they *won't* be inviting them for a job talk, or do you only hear from them if they're interested?

If you think this is a worthwhile topic, perhaps you could open a post for comments so that hiring committee members could say what their procedure is.

My impression is that schools will contact the candidates they are most interested in within the first two weeks after the AALS hiring convention, and, more often than not, within the first week.  Schools will often have some candidates "on hold" beyond this period of time:  e.g., because they are reading more work by the candidate, or collecting references, or waiting to see how they fare with their top choices.  So it is quite possible to get call-backs beyond the two-week window.  Schools tend to be much slower in notifying candidates they are no longer in contention (you might not hear for a month or more). 

Schools higher in the "food chain" in general do move at a somewhat more, shall we say, "leisurely" pace, and schools lower in the "food chain" are more likely to have tiers of candidates they remain interested in, on the theory that they are likely to lose their first-round choices.

Those, to repeat, are my impressions, based on a decent amount of anecdotal evidence.  But I invite others to post their impressions and/or information about their school's practices.  No anonymous postings.  Post only once, comments are moderated and may take awhile to appear.

October 21, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Professional Advice | Permalink | Comments (16)

October 08, 2015

UC Irvine's Lawsky on the entry-level hiring market in law schools

September 09, 2015

Teaching statements

An increasing number of schools are now asking candidates to supply "teaching statements."  This is common in many PhD fields, where, of course, the candidates typically have teaching experience.   I'm more doubtful how productive it is on the law teaching market.  But mostly I'm curious what readers, either faculty or candidates (candidates may post with a pseudonym) think should go into such a statement.   Here are some possibilities:  (1) texts you favor for certain subjects, and why; (2) "Socratic" vs. lecture vs. other teaching modalities, why and how you expect to use them; (3) "experiential" components of courses you might use; (4) how your practice experience (or PhD study or other pertinent experience) will factor into your teaching. 

What else?

September 9, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers | Permalink | Comments (7)

September 08, 2015

NLJ on market for new law teachers

Blog Emperor Caron has some excerpts (it is otherwise behind a paywall).  The chart overstates the hiring, since it includes all faculty appointments, not only tenure-stream academic lines.  My anecdotal impression is that more schools are hiring, and hiring for more positions, this year--we won't get over 100 new hires, but I am guessing we will get to 80 or more (compared to 60 or 65 the last two years).  With the enrollment decline over, schools can now budget for the future and start filling positions that need to be filled.

September 8, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Faculty News, Legal Profession, Of Academic Interest | Permalink

August 20, 2015

The first FAR distribution: only 410 candidates, down from over 600 about five years ago

Sarah Lawsky (UC Irvine) has the numbers.   In the past, I would estimate that 50% of those in the FAR were non-starters wasting their time and their money.  That percentage has probably gone down with the amount of information easily accessible via the Internet.  But does the drop in total applicants represent the casual/tourist candidates not bothering or does it represent credible, but well-informed candidates deciding to wait in light of the weak market?  I'm not sure.  Here's another data point:  there are roughly 200 candidates in the FAR with JDs or LLMs from Yale, Chicago, Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan, Columbia, NYU, and Virginia, to take schools that send sizable numbers into law teaching on a regular basis.  Add in graduates of Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, Northwestern, Penn, Southern California, and Texas, and the total rises to about 270.   Not all these candidates are going to turn out to be serious--I'd guess 15-25% of these folks threw their hat in the ring without much consultation or preparation.  If, in fact, there is more hiring this year (my impression so far is that the number of schools hiring is up slightly), then it could turn out to be a good year to be on the teaching market given the overall decline in candidates--but it's too soon to say for sure.

August 20, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Faculty News, Of Academic Interest | Permalink

August 17, 2015

Packets from job seekers: electronic or hard copy or both?

This is the week that job seekers in law teaching are sending out packets of their materials to the schools they are particularly interested in.  The question often arises whether to send the materials via e-mail or via regular mail or both.  I generally advise both, but I'm curious what readers with experience in hiring think.  (Comments are moderated and may take awhile to appear, so please submit the comment just once and be patient.  Thank you.)

August 17, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers | Permalink | Comments (6)

July 24, 2015

Hiring Committees for 2015-16

The Prawfs thread has been open for about ten days now, and will be useful to those on the teaching market.  Other schools can also announce their hiring plans for this coming year.

July 24, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers | Permalink

July 22, 2015

Rostron & Levit's useful compilation of information about submitting to law reviews...

...has been updated again.  They write:

We  just updated our charts about law journal submissions, expedites, and rankings from different sources for the Fall 2015 submission season covering the 204 main journals of each law school.  

A couple of the highlight from this round of revisions are: 

First, the chart now includes as much information as possible about what law reviews are not accepting submissions right now and what dates they say they'll resume accepting submissions.  Most of this is not specific dates, because the journals tend to post only imprecise statements about how the journal is not currently accepting submissions but will start doing so at some point in spring.

Second, there continues to be a gradual increase in the number of journals using and preferring Scholastica instead of ExpressO or accepting emails submissions: 22 journals prefer or strongly prefer Scholastica, 14 more list it as one of the alternative acceptable avenues of submission, and 10 now list Scholastica as the exclusive method of submission.  

The first chart contains information about each journal’s preferences about methods for submitting articles (e.g., e-mail, ExpressO, Scholastica, or regular mail), as well as special formatting requirements and how to request an expedited review.  The second chart contains rankings information from U.S. News and World Report as well as data from Washington & Lee’s law review website.

The Washington & Lee data, I should note, is mostly silly (among other things, it does not control for publication volume by the journals).  Law review prominence and visibility tracks law school reputation, full stop.  For some specialty journals, the W&L data is somewhat useful, but that's about it.

July 22, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Of Academic Interest, Professional Advice | Permalink

June 18, 2015

SALT salary survey, 2014-15

Here.  Schools with the highest salaries tend not to participate in this survey, but it does give a realistic sense of what's going on at most law schools in the U.S.

June 18, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Of Academic Interest | Permalink

May 20, 2015

Lawsky's rookie hiring data for 2014-15

Here.  Prof. Lawsky counts only tenure-track hires, whether academic or clinical; she reports a total of 70 new hires this year, slightly down from last year.  (It's lower if one substracts the tenure-track clinical hires, though I have not counted carefully.)  The relatively small number of Yale JDs hired (only 6) is striking, though we don't know how many graduates of each school were on the market, though based on past years I would be surprised if there weren't several dozen Yale candidates seeking, meaning the vast majority failed to land positions.  21 of the 70 hires had Harvard JDs (though several of those were coming off Fellowships, like the Bigelow), while another 27 came from just five schools (Stanford, Yale, Chicago, Berkeley, and NYU).

May 20, 2015 in Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Faculty News, Rankings | Permalink