Monday, October 17, 2016
Law School Hiring, 2016-2017, Thread Two
Please leave comments on this thread regarding whether you have received:
(a) a callback from a law school and/or accepted it; or
(b) an offer from a law school and/or accepted it; feel free to also leave details about the offer, including teaching load, research leave, etc. A school listed as "offer accepted" may have made more than one offer and may still have some slots open.
Five miscellaneous things:
1. If you don't want your contact information displayed, enter firstname.lastname@example.org or something like that as an email address.
2. There is a separate thread, "A Clearinghouse for Questions," for general questions or comments about the teaching market. Please do not use the thread below for general questions or comments.
4. The year's first hiring thread is here. Comments to that thread are now closed.
5. If you would like to enter the information on a spreadsheet, the spreadsheet is available here:
You can also add your information to the spreadsheet via this Google form, which was created by someone on the market this year.
Here is a link to the last page of comments.
Originally posted October 17, 2016.
Just got Northwestern and Cornell dings in quick succession. I really like getting rejections. It closes doors with dignity (for both school and candidate). I guess it might be easier for me to say because I have several callbacks with schools I'd be really happy at. Or maybe it's just because I love getting disciplined. *lights a match*
Posted by: Cheryl/Carol/Carina | Oct 21, 2016 12:00:54 PM
Anyone heard of calls from Notre dame?
Posted by: 3NT | Oct 21, 2016 12:09:17 PM
At this point I have had the pleasure of receiving a number of email dings, alas. Is there a substantive difference between "we have decided not to pursue your candidacy" and "we are not able to offer you a callback at this time"? Also, if there is anyone on this chain who was an interviewer (as opposed to an interviewee) last weekend, I would love your thoughts on what set apart "winning" candidates.
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 12:55:45 PM
Does anyone know anything about T14 schools? Northwestern, Cornell, and Georgetown have callback activity (either dings or invites) listed on the spreadsheet, but none of the others.
Posted by: anon | Oct 21, 2016 3:00:44 PM
Posted by: anon | Oct 21, 2016 3:29:19 PM
Anon Oct 21, 2016 3:00:44 PM: I read "we have decided not to pursue your candidacy" as you have no shot, and "we are not able to offer you a callback" as you probably have no shot unless they have a failed search and have to go back to their candidate pool. I don't think there's much of a substantive difference.
So much of the hiring process is attributable to fit and happenstance that it's hard to give a definitive answer to the question of what separates the callbacks and the non-callbacks. We easily could have called back 6 or 7 of the candidates we saw for one position, but we will ultimately call back half of those-- so people we aren't calling back are people we would be happy to have at our school.
Here are some of the things that distinguished candidates (not necessarily in order of importance):
(1) Overall fit-- in terms of geographical preferences, subject matter fit, etc. As has been said before, unless you're interviewing at a top school, you should be ready to explain how the school is a good geographic fit for you. We preferred those with credible answers because we don't want to "waste" a callback on someone who probably won't accept an offer from us. We also preferred candidates whose teaching preferences were squarely within what we were looking for.
(2) Demonstrable interest in our school. At least one candidate clearly had done no research about our school and asked questions accordingly. The candidates we called back had done their homework and had specific questions tailored to us.
(3) Credentials, both in terms of practice experience and in terms of JD prestige (which matters to some people on the faculty and in the university administration). It means we didn't call back candidates without practice experience or whose JDs were from lower-ranked schools. Some of the candidates we didn't call back because of lack of practice experience and/or prestige factor were among the committee's top choices otherwise.
(4) Personality. We have a smaller faculty, so it's important to us to hire someone who will be a good colleague. We also tried to gauge what the person's personality in the classroom would be like. If we were bored in the interview, we figured students would be bored in the classroom.
(5) Teaching styles/methods. We want to make sure candidates will be able to teach in a way that's effective for our students, who have a broad range of skill levels and background experience. Candidates we liked more were those who could explain how they will be able to teach everyone. Prior teaching experience helps here because candidates were able to describe what they actually do.
(6) Research agenda. We had a couple of candidates who didn't seem to have thought about what they might write in the future. By and large, though, everyone had a credible agenda, so our decisions didn't turn on this. It may have been different for other schools.
I hope that helps.
Posted by: Hiring Prof | Oct 21, 2016 4:14:32 PM
Anyone hear from ONU Law?
Posted by: Anon2 | Oct 21, 2016 4:14:42 PM
I have heard of both callbacks and rejections from ONU.
Posted by: anon | Oct 21, 2016 4:15:44 PM
Anyone heard of calls from Hastings (post AALS)?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 4:31:13 PM
Anyone heard of calls from Hastings (post AALS)?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 4:31:13 PM
I'm the hiring chair at Arizona State. I just wanted to let everyone know that we haven't made any decisions yet but hope to within the next several days.
Posted by: Zack Gubler | Oct 21, 2016 4:53:28 PM
Berkeley? They even interviewing this year?
Posted by: The Dude | Oct 21, 2016 5:24:36 PM
I heard Drake sent out dings, including to people they didn't interview at the FRC. Which is still admirable transparency, I guess.
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 5:30:46 PM
What an excellent post -- I would list those exact same things (other than J.D. prestige -- we care less about that, and if the JD is a problem, we wouldn't have interviewed them in D.C. in the first place). Personality is a big part of it, and I'm particularly influenced by demonstrated interest in our school. We met with quite a few folks who it was clear to us that we weren't one of the interviews they were super excited about; for those who did seem excited to be meeting with us, our interest level went up. Another thing I might list is just depth of responses -- some folks gave rather short, shallow answers to our questions; others seemed much more thoughtful. Finally, we "Googled" each candidate and also checked their social media presence -- some were sadly eliminated on that basis as we found things that could potentially embarrass the school.
Posted by: HiringChair | Oct 21, 2016 5:42:51 PM
Dear Hiring Prof and HiringChair, thank you. Out of curiosity, do you make someone with a social media problem aware of that fact? And I take it you gauged interest in your school by the questions asked?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 5:48:15 PM
We gauged interest in part by the questions the candidates asked, which demonstrated their research into our school (or lack thereof). Other indicators of interest included (1) reaching out to us directly pre-AALS to express interest, (2) sending thank you notes after the interview, and (3) chatting with us at the cocktail reception.
Speaking of the cocktail reception on Friday at AALS, why did so few candidates go? Unless one of the schools invited you to dinner, it would have been a good move for you to attend and talk with the faculty members who interviewed you. Conversations with candidates at the reception definitely informed our opinions of whether they were interested in us.
Posted by: Hiring Prof | Oct 21, 2016 5:55:50 PM
What cocktail reception? Wasn't the only reception for "religiously affiliated" schools?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 21, 2016 6:14:49 PM
There was a reception Friday from 6 - 7:30 for all registrants and recruitment teams. The turnout was very small-- both interviewers and interviewees.
Posted by: Hiring Prof | Oct 21, 2016 6:24:08 PM
I would also be interested in the social media question. I thoroughly investigated my own social media presence prior to the market and concluded there was nothing problematic, but if there was something I overlooked (or misjudged), I would certainly want someone to let me know about it rather than to just leave me guessing.
Posted by: Social Problems | Oct 21, 2016 7:17:12 PM
Is it safe to say that if we have seen on here that callbacks have been made at schools where we have interviewed, but have not heard from said schools, that we are out of the running?
Posted by: AnxiousAnon | Oct 21, 2016 8:10:00 PM
I wouldn't say that. Some schools have a B list they'll dip into if things don't work out with their first choices. Some schools with multiple lines may call back for one before the other. When I was on the market, I got a callback in the second week from a school that had made calls in the first week. So it's not a good sign if they've already made calls, but it's not dispositive either.
Posted by: Yesteryear | Oct 21, 2016 8:51:15 PM
FWIW, we notified those who we put in the alternate pool of their status, and we sent everyone else rejections.
Posted by: HiringChair | Oct 21, 2016 9:55:58 PM
To The Dude above, I have heard of Berkeley callbacks.
Posted by: Reply | Oct 22, 2016 12:08:38 AM
What does it mean when a school that you interviewed with has sent both invites and dings, but you haven't been contacted yet? Is it a stealth ding, or a maybe call-to-come?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 22, 2016 5:19:08 AM
@anon 5:19:08: it probably means you're B list (still a maybe). but note dings reported here could have been a result of prompting (responses to emails asking for a status check/saying the candidate will be in the area/etc.).
Posted by: committee member | Oct 22, 2016 6:48:12 AM
How many people are put on the b list? If 3 people are in tier one, are another 3-4 in tier two?
Posted by: anon | Oct 22, 2016 8:16:49 AM
We had 3 callbacks and three alternates. Btw, we did not cut people based on social media (none were that bad, but some were close -- be careful folks!) but we did cut people whose google searches turned up troubling things (like currently being involved in litigation or playing a large role in some past scandal, those sorts of things).
Posted by: HiringChair | Oct 22, 2016 8:32:31 AM
HiringChair and Hiring Prof are you serious about the thank you notes, the cocktail conversations and the social media searches? It sounds like a bad hoax...
Posted by: Erm | Oct 22, 2016 8:51:14 AM
My comments are 100% serious. We didn't care about thank you notes, although it may influenced us a bit in deciding between two candidates for our last callback slot. And nobody from our committee even went to the reception.
Posted by: HiringChair | Oct 22, 2016 8:55:06 AM
For us, thank you notes were an extra indication of interest--not dispositive, but a plus factor nonetheless. We didn't base decisions on the notes (we called back two who didn't write notes), but they influenced our thoughts about how interested candidates were in our school.
The cocktail party was helpful because it gave us a chance to have more in-depth conversations with candidates. Some really helpful information can come up then (or in the lobby, etc.). We always try to have a sense of whether we are calling back people who will actually accept our offer. It's definitely not true that every candidate who accepts a callback ultimately agrees to accept an offer from that school (even without an offer from a different school). One of these informal conversations helped to convince us that one of the candidates we ultimately called back really was willing to move to our location, and that person was called back because of it. My point about the cocktail party is to use every opportunity you have to persuade a school of your desirability and your interest.
Posted by: Hiring Prof | Oct 22, 2016 9:57:52 AM
I don't know why the social media or cocktail schmooze are all that surprising. It's info that applies to any job you might take. It's 2016. Your future employers will search the interwebs to gather intel. People network during cocktail parties. There's really nothing shocking about either of those.
Posted by: anon | Oct 22, 2016 10:18:31 AM
If we haven't heard one way or another by now (and others have been contacted from the schools we interviewed with), would a follow up email be appropriate now that it is one week out? (for my particular situation, I went to the networking reception, chatted with committee members and thought it went well, and followed up with a thank you notes after the conference ended)
Posted by: Anon | Oct 22, 2016 2:44:07 PM
Folks who have received Alabama callbacks, are you on the clinical side or the doctrinal side? I had a FRC interview for clinical and thought it went really well, but have heard nothing. No ding, which is good, but no call either. Thanks.
Posted by: anon | Oct 22, 2016 3:01:12 PM
Has anyone heard back from Berkeley?
Posted by: anon | Oct 24, 2016 8:50:58 AM
Any word from Texas?
Posted by: AnonLongHorn | Oct 24, 2016 8:59:31 AM
Anyone heard from Howard?
Posted by: 3NT | Oct 24, 2016 11:37:57 AM
Anyone hear from Loyola (Chi)? Is the spreadsheet correct that they continued screening interviews as recently as the middle of last week?
Posted by: anonymous | Oct 24, 2016 1:04:44 PM
Texas A&M sent out decline letters.
Posted by: anon | Oct 24, 2016 2:03:56 PM
Any hear of callbacks or dings from Colorado?
Posted by: anon | Oct 24, 2016 6:14:17 PM
I've heard Notre Dame has dinged people.
Posted by: Anon | Oct 25, 2016 10:04:47 AM
The last page link isn't working.
Posted by: anon | Oct 25, 2016 1:36:26 PM
Fixed, I think.
Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Oct 25, 2016 4:46:48 PM
How about color shading cell rows of schools with calls vs. no calls?
Posted by: anon | Oct 25, 2016 5:16:22 PM
People should feel free to edit the spreadsheet in any way that will make it more useful.
Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Oct 25, 2016 5:20:01 PM
Anyone hear from UCLA?
Posted by: Charlie Brown | Oct 25, 2016 8:09:50 PM
Has anyone heard from the overseas schools, like Hong Kong or Zurich?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 26, 2016 4:26:23 AM
Posted by: 3NT | Oct 26, 2016 1:16:10 PM
Hong Kong still making decisions about callbacks.
Posted by: anon | Oct 26, 2016 1:40:01 PM
I believe that ETH Zurich isn't making any decisions until late Nov/early Dec when their entire hiring committee meets.
Posted by: anon | Oct 26, 2016 2:39:31 PM
Can I request that we put in dates instead of "Yes" for call backs? Next year, candidates will be interested in the dates of past call backs, not just that they happened.
Posted by: funwithdata | Oct 26, 2016 4:41:31 PM
Am I right that there have been callbacks from BU, LSU, and Richmond?
Posted by: funwithdata | Oct 26, 2016 4:48:00 PM
Anyone here heard from Duquesne (yay or nay) for the Int'l/Con Law position?
Posted by: Anon | Oct 26, 2016 6:10:43 PM
Did a bunch of information disappear for other people? Also why can't people put in the dates.
Posted by: anon | Oct 26, 2016 10:01:51 PM
Anyone hear from Tulane or Loyola Chicago about callbacks?
Also, I really hope all committees will consider giving candidates email updates after callback decisions have been made. It takes only a few seconds and can make a huge difference to the candidates. Waiting in the dark is the worst.
Posted by: waiting... | Oct 26, 2016 10:10:11 PM
@Hiring Prof: Why would a committee waste time interviewing candidates who don't have the right credentials? It is a disservice to all involved to interview people who don't have enough "prestige" to get hired. I thought AALS interviewees were all candidates who were hire-able on paper, and the interviews are really about the personality, smart as you look on paper, and fit questions.
Posted by: anon | Oct 27, 2016 9:01:11 AM
Got to love this, had a few interviews, one that I thought went well and nothing. Apparently there have been callbacks and dings for the schools I interviewed, but I have not heard a peep. Don't mind the ding at this point, just put us out of our misery.
Posted by: anon | Oct 27, 2016 10:57:19 AM
to the above: it is likely you won't hear back from many schools - get use to it. I actually did a callback at a school - went to dinner, spent the whole day there and all - last year and I still have never heard back! I was going to email but I think after a period of time you realize the writing is on the wall so I figure what is the point- it is not like the school is going to "forget" to give you an offer. Many schools will not inform rejected candidates until someone accepts an offer or the search fails. You can partly blame HR and legal stuff for committees often lacking without humanity.
Posted by: anon | Oct 27, 2016 11:56:37 AM
has anyone heard from Iowa clinical? thanks!
Posted by: anon | Oct 27, 2016 12:14:32 PM
anon | Oct 27, 2016 9:01:11 AM: The hiring process involves many different layers of decision makers. Sometimes people higher up the chain unexpectedly veto decisions made lower down the chain. Ideally, this happens before AALS. Sometimes it doesn't.
I agree that interviewing someone whom you know will never be acceptable to the university is inappropriate-- a waste of everyone's time, effort, and emotion. But hiring committees can't always predict with perfect accuracy how others will react to certain candidates.
Posted by: Hiring Prof | Oct 27, 2016 12:54:05 PM
Colorado has made its initial callbacks, and is still considering whether to make more.
Posted by: Anon | Oct 27, 2016 1:29:14 PM