« Junior Prawfs - developing new research arcs Part II | Main | Judicial Review in Britain »

Thursday, August 15, 2019

Law School Hiring Spreadsheet and Clearinghouse for Questions, 2019-2020

I. The Spreadsheet

In the spreadsheet, you can enter information regarding whether you have received

(a) a first round interview at a school (including the subject areas the school mentioned, if any, as being of particular interest, and whether the interview offer was accepted);

(b)  a callback from a law school and/or accepted it; or

(c) 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.

Law professors may also choose to provide information that is relevant to the entry-level market.  

Anyone can edit the spreadsheet; I will not be editing it or otherwise monitoring it. It is available here:

II. The Comment Thread

In this comment thread to this post, you can ask questions about the law teaching market, and professors or others can weigh in.

Both questions and answers can be anonymous, but I will delete pure nastiness, irrelevance, and misinformation. If you see something that you know to be wrong, please feel free to let me know via email, sarah*dot*lawsky*at*law*dot*northwestern*dot*edu.

You may want to take a look at the many questions and answers in the threads from 2014-20152015-20162016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019. In general, there's quite a cache of materials relevant to the law job market under the archive categories Getting a Job on the Law Teaching Market and Entry Level Hiring Report.

Posted by Sarah Lawsky on August 15, 2019 at 09:00 AM in Getting a Job on the Law Teaching Market | Permalink

Comments

How many times is unhealthy to refresh this page? Hoping for some clarity but the silence is killing me.

Posted by: Refreshing | Dec 9, 2019 5:12:54 PM

Georgia State has made multiple offers.

Posted by: Anonprof | Dec 9, 2019 7:42:41 AM

don't fret if you see a school listed but you don't have an offer. I saw one of mine listed and was disappointed thinking I did not get offer. Turns out I did and the offer listed was for the other position. Many schools are giving multiple offers out. also many schools just met on Friday and I know of at least 2 who are meeting this week.

Posted by: anon | Dec 8, 2019 10:25:27 PM

Comparing to humanities actually makes me feel better about not doing well in this process this year. I am in a specialty area where there are only about 10 schools advertising that as an interest area and very few schools willing to use someone with my focus for a different teaching area. Many of those slots will be filled by someone not in my specialty because someone on the committee or the dean decides to go a different route. So maybe 5 of those schools will actually hire someone in my specialty. How can I feel bad about myself when there are likely many more candidates than that competing for those few slots? Moreover, every one of those candidates that I know other than me has been on the market repeatedly. I can stop blaming myself for not being wanted and blame the numbers and idiosyncrasies at least a little bit.

Posted by: Perspective | Dec 6, 2019 2:37:50 PM

For some context, here is some data on the number of tenure-track jobs advertised in humanities fields relative to the number of new PhDs in those fields: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/28/more-humanities-phds-are-awarded-job-openings-are-disappearing

Posted by: prof | Dec 6, 2019 12:18:45 PM

" in history and english in particular, the average number of entry-level tenure-track jobs each year, nationwide, is perhaps 0-2. And even those will often go to existing adjuncts."

That's false. History and English nearly always slot hire (including at the top schools), and if you're a History/English person, you really can only plausibly qualify for one slot -- and so it's difficult to compare. But my SO went on the History/English tt market once over the past three years, and in his slot alone (which is one of the more common/desirable sub-areas), there were nine positions hiring in that year. I don't think a single one hired an adjunct, either. I don't know how many total English/History positions there were that year, but I'd be shocked if it wasn't several multiples of that.

Posted by: anon4 | Dec 6, 2019 11:52:42 AM

I'm someone who started a TT position this year at a T50ish school after one failed round at AALS. I know not every candidate has the financial capacity or emotional bandwidth to go through it again, but if you weren't successful this year remember next year could be wildly different. If this is what you want to do, keep your head up and power through. There's no shame in taking a second bite at the apple. It is almost expected at this point that many people will have to do just that.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 6, 2019 11:34:01 AM

Anon--as somebody with friends currently on each of the history, english, and philosophy job markets, I don't think that's right. There's a fair number of adjunct positions open, but in history and english in particular, the average number of entry-level tenure-track jobs each year, nationwide, is perhaps 0-2. And even those will often go to existing adjuncts.

None of this is to trivialize the fact that the job market is tough for all involved, but some other fields definitely have it worse.

Posted by: Anomnomnom | Dec 6, 2019 10:27:31 AM

The often repeated claim that there are far fewer humanities jobs and that it is “easier” to break into legal academia is a myth. Google the number of English or History or Philosophy jobs per year. It is in the hundreds for each field. There are many more colleges than there are law schools.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 6, 2019 9:34:58 AM

edge of breakdown: it's probably almost the norm unless you are at one of the top fellows that many great applicants do this multiple times. Sometimes even top fellows do this 2-3-4 times since being overqualified also makes it hard to find a fit since schools want to find people that will stay.

With time - a few months - it's easier to get some perspective and try again. But a first timer having those feelings would need to readjust mindset and not take this personally and get a better perspective of what this process is. I think a lot of people go into this thinking- oh I have a few top 20 pubs, Ph.d,top 5 school, etc. of course I will get a job. But everyone now has those things. I have had hiring chairs tell me - "we aren't hiring in your field. but of course with your record you won't have a problem." But still sitting here I had no callbacks.

I think this is the main reason AALS submissions have almost been cut in half over the past 5 years - for many people, it is impossible to justify financially. And even if you can swing it financially, it takes a great emotional toll.

Posted by: anon | Dec 6, 2019 8:52:42 AM

"...how will you handle the truly uncomfortable conversations that occur during many faculty meetings?"

Not going has worked thus far for me.

Posted by: Seafloor ooze | Dec 5, 2019 11:58:39 PM

Not enough perspective here. This is an easy, almost luxurious process compared to the job market in the social sciences and humanities in which there are far fewer jobs and every one has to be applied for individually! Many of you have the option of going back to practice? For many on the academic job market it's $4000 adjunct contracts they're lucky to get or going through another career change in which the last decade of their life is seen as a negative.

Posted by: anon3 | Dec 5, 2019 9:21:12 PM

Edge of a Breakdown,

It is a really rough and vigorous process, and one that has no guarantee. I've personally never experienced anything like it. I took a year in-between to regroup and take a break, and I was better for it. Others go back to practice for awhile and return in a few years. Some people power right through until something catches.

I can offer some thoughts on how best to manage the process, but that probably will not be useful right about now. All I can say at this point is give yourself some time to regroup and recover before deciding on whether or not you will do it again.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 5, 2019 6:50:41 PM

I don't think I have the mental or physical health to go through this process one more time next year...

Posted by: edge of a breakdown | Dec 5, 2019 4:58:33 PM

Why do "most schools prefer silence to telling you that they made offers but you are still in their waitlist or that they haven't yet made their first offer but plan to do so by x date"? Probably because it's uncomfortable to communicate these things.
In the submission angsting threads there are always pleas for journal editors to let us know what's going on--presumably from the same set of people who, when on recruiting committees, keep mum.

Posted by: physician, heal thyself | Dec 5, 2019 4:53:27 PM

Thanks for the times on the market comments. The anxiety of this process is made much worse by weeks and sometimes months of silence from schools. Is there a reason that most schools prefer silence to telling you that they made offers but you are still in their waitlist or that they haven't yet made their first offer but plan to do so by x date?

Posted by: Thanks | Dec 5, 2019 3:57:03 PM

Thanks for the insight re: times on the market, those comments are much appreciated.

Posted by: anon | Dec 5, 2019 3:22:27 PM

In terms of the process, I went on the market twice. I guess the first year was actually a test balloon, since I had no idea how to prepare my package appropriately, establish a reputation, or get the right folks to make calls/email on my behalf.

I waited a year, focused on preparing, did a fellowship, and applied a second time (this year). I believe I will have a job after this year. Sometimes it is a question of kismet - the right year, the right hiring areas, and the school looking for a specific set of experiences or skills (yours), all of which are tough to predict until you're in the process.

That said, I've heard of folks taking three times, even ten times. I think the question is not one of how many times does it take, but how many times (and time) are you willing to take, especially in spending time doing the things that will improve your chances or opening up your geographic flexibility.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 5, 2019 2:46:06 PM

I went on the market 4 times before I got a TT position (20 years ago). It's a fundamental supply and demand problem - a relatively small number of positions and an extreme oversupply of extremely well qualified persons who want those positions each year - that creates an extremely idiosyncratic hiring process. Most of how the process functions at individual schools is 100% outside of your control so it helps nothing to drive yourself crazy or beat yourself up about it. All you can do is control that which you can -- your work and how you present yourself during the process -- and seek out means and methods of supporting your mental health and psyche while its ongoing. The academy is full of stories of individuals who took multiple years to finally succeed but then had long and successful careers once they did.

Posted by: anonprof | Dec 5, 2019 2:41:40 PM

Posted by: anon | Nov 30, 2019 5:45:09 PM

FWIW, I went on the market three times before finding a TT job. I'm now five+ years in and hope to get tenure this year.


---

I was hoping someone could weigh in on the question posted below, namely, how many times one should go on the market.

I've been through the AALS twice now. This year I received two callbacks, one from a T-100, one from a T-25. As best I can tell from my communications with some folks at the former, I 'won' the faculty vote at the T-100, but did not receive an offer from the dean due to a mismatch between what I teach and what courses they need taught. I don't expect to hear from the T-25 for another month at least, but given the competitiveness of the market, I'm not optimistic.

I'm not quite sure what to think, other than that this is an utterly dispiriting and hapless process.

Posted by: Matthew Bruckner | Dec 5, 2019 9:25:38 AM

Has anyone heard from Albany?

Posted by: Albany | Dec 4, 2019 3:57:03 PM

Conversations about how to address inequality in the classroom or how to address difficult topics related to a class the person might teach are perfectly appropriate. I had those conversations, too, and was happy to have them.
What is inappropriate and does not serve a purpose beyond determining political affinity is, e.g., making smalltalk making fun of political leaders with different affiliations to yours and looking at you expectantly when you don't laugh with them. It's honestly happened in every single one of my callbacks so far. I don't think faculty know they are doing it. There really isn't a good reason for it.

Posted by: Political conversations | Dec 3, 2019 1:59:43 PM

Conversations about, e.g., racial and economic disparities or other tough issues that have a political dimension is not the same as talking politics. Those kind of conversations are fine, for the reasons you identify. The conversations that are problematic are the ones that are about or designed to elicit information about, e.g., party affiliation, ideological orientation, or voting behavior.

Posted by: tiny bit cynical | Dec 3, 2019 1:44:44 PM

Re: Politics

Maybe I'm the anomaly here, but I actually don't think talking politics is a bad thing. For one, this is the world in which we live, and students will likely be bringing up these topics in the classroom. At my call-back, I had an open conversation about racial and economic disparities and asked how the school was seeking to address these, as well getting a sense for how professors are addressing in-class political discussions that can become heated (and border or cross the line into inappropriate and disrespectful). Ultimately, this school made an offer, and I hope to some extent it was because I was willing to engage in these conversations.

Although I don't think seeking to "test" candidates as to their political affiliation is fair, having political conversations certainly is appropriate to our role as law professors, as we do not just articulate what the law is, we also seek to shape and develop it, as will our students. If it was truly uncomfortable and a dogmatic test, I question whether that law school is the place you'll want to make your career anyway, and perhaps knowing that sooner rather than later is to your benefit.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 3, 2019 1:33:43 PM

Re political discussions, it appears from the conversations that faculty are not testing whether candidates can have difficult conversations or otherwise engaging in these discussions for helpful purposes of evaluating the candidate's value as a professor. That can be done using questions related to the job talk or legal theory, etc. The political smalltalk conversations are conveying that everyone in the room has a particular political belief and that a candidate who expresses other beliefs will be disliked and potentially not voted in. This is about testing affinity, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Judging candidates by their affinity is not a good way for a school to find the best people.

I would hope that faculty who are not aware that they are making candidates uncomfortable or setting themselves up for affinity bias would choose to focus on other methods of testing candidate's skills and making smalltalk.

Posted by: Political conversations | Dec 3, 2019 12:54:35 PM

And, some talk politics because they expect intelligent adults to be able to have difficult conversations with each other even when they might disagree with each other. If you're too delicate for political conversations, how will you handle the truly uncomfortable conversations that occur during many faculty meetings?

Posted by: anonprof | Dec 3, 2019 10:48:38 AM

Some faculty talk politics because they are used to being surrounded by homogeneous opinions and it just doesn't occur to them that the discussion would make a candidate uncomfortable. Some of them do it because they assume the candidate agrees with them and they want to give comfort that the candidate will feel at home in, e.g., a red state that hosts a liberal law faculty. Others are more aware and calculating and are indeed trying to suss out whether the candidate has the "right" political views to join the faculty.

Posted by: tiny bit cynical | Dec 3, 2019 10:18:47 AM

Who do faculty feel like it's okay to talk about politics during callbacks? You would never gauge who someone's voting for as part of any other job interview. I don't think faculty mean to do it and they think they are just making smalltalk by talking about the news or something, but please keep in mind that it makes candidates uncomfortable if they feel like they have to stake out their political position in an interview. Just stay away from religion and politics unrelated to the courses the person is teaching.

Posted by: anon | Dec 2, 2019 1:32:40 PM

Wish We Knew More - I feel your pain. I am in the same boat. This is a weird year. I anticipate many first offers will be rejected because it is less competitive than in prior years and there is more demand. Top candidates have a high likelihood of getting better offers at higher ranked schools. I think it will take some time to shake out. At least that's what I am telling myself.

Posted by: anon | Dec 2, 2019 10:56:27 AM

No offers for me yet. I'm checking the chart nervously to see whether the schools where I did callbacks have made any offers yet. Because they said that they would make offers before Thanksgiving, I presume that they have made those initial offers to others. But please update the chart or email candidates to let them know, e.g., that the candidate did not receive the first offer but additional offers might be made. I could calm down if I knew

Posted by: Wish We Knew More | Dec 2, 2019 10:49:56 AM

I think you're not getting many responses to the question about how many times to go on the market for a few reasons: (1) there is no good data on what is common because the only source of it, AALS, doesn't share; (2) the anecdotes are somewhat limited because people, generally and especially in our profession, are adverse to discussing their "failures"; and (3) the decision is personal and highly idiosyncratic and what is possible, tolerable, or right for one person is likely to say little about the decision someone else can or should make.

Posted by: anonprof | Dec 2, 2019 9:35:06 AM

Oh sorry for being unclear! I meant what type of articles the T20 accepts for publication in their flagship law journals.

Posted by: anon | Dec 1, 2019 6:31:13 PM | Dec 1, 2019 7:50:37 PM

Accept for what? For publication in their law review? As a job-talk paper? I'm thrown by the inclusion of blog posts in the question.

Posted by: Query | Dec 1, 2019 7:26:23 PM

I figure a lot of eyes may be on this thread right now, so I'm going to ask an only tangentially related question. Does anyone know of any studies on what articles the T14 (or T20) accept? Any level of formality, from blog posts to formal papers (I know the latter is unlikely). Basically I'm interested in subject matter, length, and institutional affiliation or any other quirks. Thanks in advance!

Posted by: anon | Dec 1, 2019 6:31:13 PM

"When is too soon? Is there a delicate way to gauge at a new school when they would be okay with you visiting? How does one negotiate the time away from the school? I imagine there is some possibility of colleague resentment for whoever has to take over your courses?"

Yes - there is likely to be some resentment if, after accepting an offer at a school, your first move is to try to leave. The school is making a substantial commitment to you and I would be wary of demonstrating a lack of reciprocity in that commitment right away. When you arrive, it would probably behoove you to be a good citizen of your home school first, then think about other options. In the event that you could never see yourself staying at your home school, you may wish to think about whether you should have accepted the offer, or why you did. That may help reframe the issue.

Posted by: Anon | Dec 1, 2019 1:48:35 PM

I was hoping someone could weigh in on the question posted below, namely, how many times one should go on the market.

I've been through the AALS twice now. This year I received two callbacks, one from a T-100, one from a T-25. As best I can tell from my communications with some folks at the former, I 'won' the faculty vote at the T-100, but did not receive an offer from the dean due to a mismatch between what I teach and what courses they need taught. I don't expect to hear from the T-25 for another month at least, but given the competitiveness of the market, I'm not optimistic.

I'm not quite sure what to think, other than that this is an utterly dispiriting and hapless process.

Posted by: anon | Nov 30, 2019 5:45:09 PM

@TT visit: I'm at a good, non-elite school on the east coast. Based on my experience, the message from Margaret Radin on this thread is still basically accurate:

http://osaka.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/wannabe.htm

I'd love to know what others think.

Posted by: Just a Prof | Nov 30, 2019 5:33:14 PM

HiringProf: thanks so much for that. You mentioned it is happening earlier. When is too soon? Is there a delicate way to gauge at a new school when they would be okay with you visiting? How does one negotiate the time away from the school? I imagine there is some possibility of colleague resentment for whoever has to take over your courses? Have you found any good resources on this or - like you said - it is just opaque and there really isn’t anywhere to look for information on this?

Posted by: TT visit | Nov 30, 2019 10:44:56 AM

Re: visits.

This is called "visiting" or "visiting away." There are two kinds of visits, "podium visits" and "look see visits." Podium visits mean the school just needs you to fill a short-term curricular need. A look see visit means they are considering you for a possible appointment. The obvious reason to do a look see visit is to get a better job. But some people also like to visit just for a change of pace, to meet more people in the field, or to live temporarily in a different location.

The school won't always tell you which kind of visit they're offering you. You can ask. They'll probably tell you if you ask, but they may not tell the truth. Sometimes schools pretend that a podium visit is a look see visit because they really need you to fill a curricular need but are afraid you won't visit unless they tell you it's a look see. It is unethical, but it happens.

For the most part, these just happen because the school reaches out to you. But if you're really eager to do it, you can try to make it happen in three ways. A few people put their names in the F.A.R. distribution, but this signals to your school that you're trying to get away so it's pretty uncommon. A few people formally send in their cvs to the hiring chairs at various places. Most people informally network insteak. You tell your friends at other schools that you would be interested in visiting or lateraling if they have any interest. If you don't have friends, you tell your acquaintances. If you don't have acquaintances, you need to make some.

There's no set timeline. It used to be that these were especially concentrated in the years right after you got tenure or right after you published a really important piece in a prestigious journal. Now, for the best candidates it can happen earlier and earlier as each school is trying to get ahead of the others.

Most home schools are tolerant of an occasional visit. But some can get jealous, and if you visit too much they assume you don't like it and want to leave.

This is a really opaque part of the process, even more so than the entry market.

Posted by: Hiring Prof | Nov 30, 2019 10:37:15 AM

I recently accepted a TT position (don’t worry - added it to the sheet a while ago). Can anyone share resources or knowledge about being a visiting professor from your home institution? I’m trying to find information via googling and exploring specific schools of interest, but I’m not finding much. What is the proper terminology for visiting from a home institution? When does one typically get this opportunity? What are the motivations other than trying to turn it into a lateral move? Is this something you need to apply for? Do schools offer it out of the blue once you make a name for yourself? Do home institutions get skittish about these visits or embrace them? All information about this process is welcomed.

Posted by: TT visit | Nov 30, 2019 2:53:11 AM

Someone asked: "For those who find that being at a B-100 school has a negative impact on one's ability to advance in one's field, do you think the effect is strong enough that looking back you would have turned down an offer at a lower ranked school to either (a) see what happens at higher ranked schools interviewing in the spring or (b) try again another year"

Toughie. I teach in a specific genre of law particularly germane to my city, so I am perfectly happy here with all the side practice opportunities that can outstrip my professor salary. Were that not the case, I would have stayed on the market (and kept practicing) or waited to see what higher ranked schools were plotting. I wouldn't settle where I had no ties, whether personal or professional, to the city or region.

Posted by: Seafloor ooze | Nov 28, 2019 12:32:22 PM

If you have heard of first offers coming out of a school, say through a friend who received an offer there or if you are a faculty member, it would be helpful to post "heard they made an offer" or something on the chart.

Posted by: Heard of Offers | Nov 27, 2019 12:21:23 PM

Second anon's comment to hiring chairs.

Two quick questions:

1) Do chairs usually tell candidates after a faculty vote that they are not even waitlisted?

2) What is the etiquette re. contacting chairs if you know the faculty has voted and offers were made?

Posted by: QuestionSoManyQuestions | Nov 26, 2019 5:37:30 PM

A note to hiring chairs. We understand you are in a difficult position re: backups if you have an open offer. But transparency is the best policy. It would be helpful to back-up candidates to provide them with a simple update. Hi, we've made our first offers. Candidates have a rough deadline of X, and we will get back to you around X with a more concrete decision. There is no reason to simply ignore candidates that came to your school when they know you have made an offer. Transparency about timelines helps to limit anxiety and is a + for the school.

Posted by: anon | Nov 26, 2019 4:04:23 PM

Re timing, my experience with late-fall offers is also around 2-3 weeks (the timing around offers changes a bit as the season progresses).

And I have not and would not keep an offer open for a day longer than is necessary, especially when it comes to turning down offers. It's a nice thing to do for your fellow candidates (and for the schools), but it's also good from the perspective of self interest: the more everything moves in this process, the better it is for you as well. Numerous schools every year have failed searches--almost certainly including some that most here would be ecstatic about--and minimizing that by moving quickly when you can move quickly doesn't just help everyone, it also potentially helps you. There are weird domino effects in this process.

Finally, for the candidate considering a T40 offer, it really just depends on your candidacy and your preferences. It's not necessarily unreasonable to turn down an offer that good the possibility of something better -- and there will usually be a candidate or two each year who do just that -- but that doesn't make it automatically the correct decision either. Think about how excited you are about your various options, try to get an honest assessment of your chances from your references, and maybe even consider reaching out to the other chairs to get their sense of your chances.

Posted by: aa | Nov 26, 2019 3:03:41 PM

Curious,

I would suspect that some first-choice candidates have, on average, one to two offers. With that in mind, I'd say there is a better than 50% chance that the first candidate will accept, assuming no geographic limitations. After that point, hiring faculty usually move to the second preferred candidate.

Hiring faculty might have a better sense from direct experience.

All the best,
Anon

Posted by: Anon | Nov 26, 2019 1:55:14 PM

How common is for schools to have their first offer declined?


Re: Congratulations on all your offers, Anon Candidate!

Posted by: Curious | Nov 26, 2019 12:57:20 PM

How common is for schools to have their first offer declined?


Re: Congratulations on all your offers, Anon Candidate!

Posted by: Curious | Nov 26, 2019 12:57:19 PM

Re: Offers

I've received three offers from a smattering of law schools, potential for two more. Those where I've received first offers have deadlines of beginning to mid-December, which I hear is pretty usual. However, there are two that will not even decide until mid-December. There are some later-stage schools where I have declined interviews to not waste their time due to the timing horizon for other good offers. This is important to know because some schools are interviewing for multiple lines and have done this in priority order. The process is not done, yet.

In my experience, the offers are good for 2-3 weeks. Sometimes if schools suspect you will receive offers from higher-ranked schools, they may give you an exploding offer, because they want to ensure they can make an offer to their second choice. If you think about it, this is pretty fair, as all schools want to get the best candidates they can. Waiting too long to notify a school if you do not plan on accepting the offer steals time from the school and may eliminate the potential for the school to offer to another candidate they also like. I would encourage everyone to tell schools as soon as you are able out of respect for that school and your fellow candidates.

Good luck, all!
Anon Candidate

Posted by: Anon | Nov 26, 2019 11:57:38 AM

For candidates with offers, how long are your offers open for?

Posted by: Deadline | Nov 26, 2019 11:27:45 AM

Do candidates with multiple offers wait until the deadline to decline offers? It seems the polite thing to do is to turn down as soon as you have made a decision and let the schools move to their next candidate.

Posted by: WL | Nov 26, 2019 11:26:34 AM

@wondering: I’m a recent hire (with a US PhD) rather than a hiring committee member so take this fwiw, but my guess is that the answer is “probably not.” OxBridge is likely the closest to a top 5 US PhD program (and obviously the top 5 schools in your PhD field are not necessarily the same as the T5 in law) but I think beyond that most US law faculties — quite understandably — don’t know how to judge the prestige of international doctoral programs and consequently probably discount them a bit more than they “should.”

Posted by: So&So | Nov 26, 2019 10:30:20 AM

We all know that having a PhD is a huge asset when on the market but I'm wondering how hiring committees view PhDs from non-American universities. Let's say the applicant also has a JD from a top US law school and has practiced here for several years, maybe also has some US law school teaching experience. Is a degree from, say, a top European or Australian school viewed as prestigious as one from the States?

Posted by: wondering | Nov 26, 2019 5:01:38 AM

It depends on how good your chances are at the T15 and T25, at how strong your preferences are between those three, and at whether you have any likely backup options if you turn down the T40 and the other two don't work out.

If the T15 is in a great location that's perfect for your family, and you've gotten strong signals from the hiring chair there, it might be worth the risk. On the other hand if you don't know anything about your chances other than you did a callback, and the fit is kind of similar between the two ... it's not so clear.

Posted by: Hiring Prof | Nov 25, 2019 11:41:22 PM

A T40 offer that will explode before a T15 and a T25 will make their decisions -- which one should I pick?

Posted by: AnonPuzzled | Nov 25, 2019 10:08:31 PM

I see on this blog several profs say they have been on the market"several"times" - how many is several? How many times does it take before one should conclude it ain't gonna happen? Is it wise to wait more than a year before going back on the market?

Posted by: dontwannabeanon | Nov 21, 2019 5:53:52 PM

Do some schools really wait until they have interviewed all their candidates--assuming they have a lot--to vote in December? How can schools keep their interviewees straight after week after week of interviews?

Posted by: anon | Nov 21, 2019 10:04:21 AM

anonprof from Nov 20, 2019 9:05:41 AM back again. I would take that first job again in a heartbeat, and I would have happily stayed at that b-100 school if the alternative was not being a law professor. I never had to face the question of a potential offer later in the spring, but I did go through the market more than once. Repeated years on the market take their toll, and eventually you have to pick an end point. You also do have to keep publishing while you're at it, although I didn't find that to be unreasonable or unpleasant. The trouble with rejecting an offer to take another run at the market is that you have zero assurance that the market will work out better the next time. (Some people say, too, that if you are on the market repeatedly, schools will find you less appealing over time. I don't think that's true, but ymmv.) You should probably not take a job at a place where you know or are pretty sure you'll be unhappy--you may well get stuck there. But rankings should be at most a small contributing factor in that calculus.

Posted by: anonprof | Nov 21, 2019 9:12:14 AM

Practice-to-Prof, feel free to email me offline (just google me) to discuss the switch after a long career in private practice and (in confidence) any questions you might have. I was a partner at Covington & Burling -- a successful one -- when I made the switch in 2014. Nobody thought I was crazy, despite the staggering drop in income for the family, and a surprising number of colleagues were wistful that they wouldn't get similar support (from their families) to make the jump. I am tenured now and don't regret it for an instant.

Posted by: Erika Lietzan | Nov 20, 2019 5:06:23 PM

Thank you, profs, for your continued candor on the career impact of being at a lower ranked school. For those who find that being at a B-100 school has a negative impact on one's ability to advance in one's field, do you think the effect is strong enough that looking back you would have turned down an offer at a lower ranked school to either (a) see what happens at higher ranked schools interviewing in the spring or (b) try again another year, presuming one can get another good publication out the door to help with the application?

Posted by: Reputation | Nov 20, 2019 2:34:36 PM

Post a comment