« Two Reasons Why Trump's January 6 Defense Is Unlikely to Work | Main | The Power of SSRN »

Monday, August 28, 2023

Law School Hiring Spreadsheet and Clearinghouse for Questions, 2023-2024

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, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023. 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 28, 2023 at 09:00 AM in Getting a Job on the Law Teaching Market | Permalink


How long does it take after an in-campus interview to get an offer? Especially if you’re the last candidate ?

Posted by: Anxious | Mar 20, 2024 10:38:51 PM

First call for info: https://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2024/03/lawsky-entry-level-hiring-report-2024-call-for-information.html

Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Mar 14, 2024 8:59:16 AM

Good call, I will go ahead and do that now.

Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Mar 14, 2024 8:44:42 AM

Just curious when the spreadsheet with entry-level hires for 2024 will be posted?

Posted by: Spreadsheet? | Mar 14, 2024 12:50:33 AM

Just curious when the spreadsheet with entry-level hires for 2024 will be posted?

Posted by: Spreadsheet? | Mar 14, 2024 12:50:33 AM

Re: the comment about housing, I raised this as an issue post-offer and received a significantly better revised offer as a result. I think framing the issue correctly really matters too.... you're more likely to have success if you genuinely want to pursue the new opportunity and express the desire/need to break even financially as something holding you back.

Posted by: Housing | Dec 13, 2023 1:17:33 PM

Are offered salaries coming in higher than in the recent past? A candidate who owns a house and would need to move - the typical lateral candidate, in other words (and some entry-levels) - would likely need to give up a favorable mortgage and go get a new loan at 7% or more.

Posted by: anon | Dec 13, 2023 12:08:01 PM

I will delete comments not relevant to this thread, and if they continue, I will close the comments.

Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Nov 30, 2023 7:55:48 AM

It's worth breaking out rough hiring timetables by elite vs. non-elite schools and entry-level vs. lateral.

At elite schools, my sense is that entry-level offers are extended in the spring semester almost exclusively. I don't have a sense of lateral market timing at these schools. My overall perception (as someone who doesn't teach at one) is that they do not feel bound by external constraints unless, perhaps, a candidate they want tells them about an offer or gears turning at a peer elite school.

At non-elite schools, entry-level offers are normally made in the fall but my sense is there's more variation in timing for both entry-level and lateral offers in general. It may not be clear whether a line exists, for example, and if so whether it needs to be for a particular subject matter (it usually does, but sometimes the focus changes). Also, even if offers are extended in the fall, they have a lower yield rate than at elite schools, so the search may continue into spring. I have seen lateral offers extended in the late spring or early summer.

Posted by: another anon | Nov 28, 2023 8:07:55 PM

"At our school this year, we probably won't make offers for some of our FT faculty lines until late February or March. This is completely normal, in my experience--although it varies a lot by school."

I have to say that after having done this process many times from both sides of the table, this makes no sense to me. Most candidates will be searching for jobs in the fall and, once the cycle has played out, will accept their best option. I don't understand how you could start after the end of the fall cycle and have people who are still available. Why not start earlier? This makes no sense.

Posted by: Anon | Nov 28, 2023 3:29:57 PM

At our school this year, we probably won't make offers for some of our FT faculty lines until late February or March. This is completely normal, in my experience--although it varies a lot by school. The timing of callbacks and offers varies based on (1) the number of positions a school is hiring for in a given year (if many lines, then there may not be enough time in the fall semester to complete Zoom interviews and in-person callbacks for everyone), and (2) the timing of university approval of FT faculty lines, among other factors.

We've made many offers fairly late in the spring semester in some years, particularly when we have to dip back into the applicant pool after losing out on other candidates. So at least at our school, the process isn't anywhere near over.

Posted by: faculty administrator | Nov 27, 2023 3:30:20 PM

In my experience, at most schools the majority of offers are made in the spring semester, as appointments committees usually start in the summer and bring in candidates in the fall and early spring. It can vary by school, but that's a common pattern. So no, it's not over at most places.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Nov 27, 2023 2:24:23 AM

I appreciate your response. To be sure, I've been a professor for over ten years, and am up for a job at another school. So I've "been around the block," so to speak. I've never heard of the timeline you suggest. But I'm happy to hear that I may still be in the game!

Posted by: anon | Nov 25, 2023 11:00:39 PM

anon - Some schools may be done, but overall, definitely not. Some schools hold most of their job talks in the Spring semester. Schools that have held callbacks may make offers over the next month or in January.

Posted by: Yesteryear | Nov 25, 2023 2:11:01 PM

Do we think schools are done making offers?

Posted by: anon | Nov 25, 2023 12:47:11 PM

"Monday, November 13, 2023. The 1861 Joint Session of Congress. Posted by Gerard Magliocca."

So... was the election of 1860 also stolen...?

Posted by: A non | Nov 13, 2023 9:12:30 AM

Can’t decide if the innumeracy or the unfounded arrogance is more hilarious

Posted by: Lol | Nov 8, 2023 7:49:15 AM

@Math Whiz, hope YOU are joking. Assuming independent events, with 12 screeners you have about a 65% chance of getting a job, and 0% if you incorrectly correct anybody's pretend math on the appointments committee.

Posted by: Lawyers Shouldn't Math | Nov 7, 2023 10:30:04 AM

AspiringLawProfessor, TT job perhaps in law, but not in math.... Hope you are joking. Assuming independent events, you have a one in twelve chance of getting a job, and zero in twelve if anybody on the appointments committee asks you about models or quantitative analysis.

Posted by: Math Whiz | Nov 6, 2023 1:47:01 PM

So if I get 12 screeners, I'm guaranteed a TT job? Math checks out!

Posted by: AspiringLawProfessor | Nov 6, 2023 10:59:54 AM

Ballpark might be 1 in 4 screening interviews lead to a callback, and maybe 1 in 3 callbacks lead to an offer? That would be my ballparkish guess, at least.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Nov 3, 2023 7:26:04 PM

I'm sure it varies, but does anyone have a ballpark sense of what percentage of screeners turn into cllbacks, and what percentage of callbacks turn into offers? I'm just trying to gauge what one should expect, on average.

Posted by: anon | Nov 3, 2023 12:42:34 PM

Does anyone know if Boston College Law School has begun reaching out for callbacks for their clinical teaching positions?

Posted by: Anonymous | Oct 30, 2023 12:57:12 AM

There's no specific formula. It the question involves pushback, it helps to show that you understand the pushback and to offer a thoughtful response. What is a thoughtful response depends on what's in the paper and what the question is. It could take any number of forms. Acknowledging a limitation. Acknowledging a limitation but showing that the overall argument is still valid and valuable. Responding with information that's responsive to the pushback. Etc. Less helpful are responses that show that the candidate doesn't understand the pushback. Responses that are defensive without attempting to respond substantively. Responses that refuse to acknowledge a limitation even when it is clearly there. Responses that show a lack of understanding of the relevant field. Responses that show that the candidate has not given any thought to a major part of their argument.

If the question calls for thinking outside the paper ("I wonder what the implications are for {other area of the law}?") it helps to sound enthusiastic about the challenge and at least game to give it a shot. Not good: "Oh, tax is not my field." Better: "I'm not familiar with this particular law, but based on what you're saying my initial thought is . . ." or "I haven't thought about that before, but it seems to me that . . ."

Posted by: AnonInterviewer | Oct 26, 2023 2:41:13 PM

"Orin and AnonInterviewer, can you perhaps share a couple points on what makes a good response or is a good overall approach/manner of responding to pushback during the screening interview? I realize that there are already posts on here on this topic, but I was hoping to hear one or two specific points that you might have in mind."

The unhelpful answer is to act like an experienced law professor. The maybe-slightly-less-unhelpful answer is to be aware of your paper's claims and its limits; open to criticisms of your arguments but aware of limits of those criticisms; and generally playful with ideas.

If a committee member says, "the problem with your paper is that it doesn't realize X," it helps to respond, "I've thought a lot about X and here's why I decided not to discuss it, although maybe I should say more on this in the paper" and then engage on it. Don't ignore the criticism, or be defensive, or say you have no interest in X. A candidate who will respond to that kind of question by starting a really interesting and open-minded conversation about X and the limits of X will make a positive impression. A candidate who doesn't want to acknowledge that the paper has potential weaknesses (every paper does!) is less likely to do so. My 2 cents.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Oct 26, 2023 2:29:48 PM

Orin and AnonInterviewer, can you perhaps share a couple points on what makes a good response or is a good overall approach/manner of responding to pushback during the screening interview? I realize that there are already posts on here on this topic, but I was hoping to hear one or two specific points that you might have in mind.

Posted by: curious | Oct 25, 2023 10:25:14 PM

Yes, and the differences among candidates are great. Some candidates are able to discuss their paper thoughtfully, respond to pushback, handle questions that call for thinking beyond the paper. Others can't. And especially in entry level hiring where there isn't much of a publication history to go by, these differences are almost the only thing that matters.

Posted by: AnonInterviewer | Oct 24, 2023 5:32:01 PM

The 30-minute screening interview do have a significant role in determining who gets a callback, at least in my experience. If done correctly, it's 30 minutes of intense q&a about a prospective candidate's work. The committee member have read the work, and they ask critical questions about what they perceive as its biggest weaknesses. The candidate then gets to respond to those critiques of their work. If done well, it's like a good oral argument that gets to the core of the candidate's scholarship really quickly.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Oct 24, 2023 4:32:17 PM

"Relatedly, since screeners are quite short, I'm curious what role they play in determining callbacks. Do schools really decide who to call back on the basis of your answers to 4-5 questions, or do they already come into screeners with a pretty strong sense of which candidates they will move to the next round?"

I've always wondered about this too. It seems crazy to judge someone with years of experience on 30 minutes of interview, especially if the questions are canned as they sometimes can be.

Posted by: Anon | Oct 24, 2023 2:56:08 PM

I'm curious what the general ratio of screeners to callbacks is. I've heard 3:1, but I have no idea if that's true.

Relatedly, since screeners are quite short, I'm curious what role they play in determining callbacks. Do schools really decide who to call back on the basis of your answers to 4-5 questions, or do they already come into screeners with a pretty strong sense of which candidates they will move to the next round?

Posted by: Applicant | Oct 24, 2023 12:32:49 PM


Is an "expression of interest" a letter/package applying for an entry-level position? I don't think there's ever a harm in doing that, although I would guess it's too late to make any difference at most places.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Oct 22, 2023 4:08:05 PM

Is it too late to send in "expressions of interest" now? What is it best to put in them at this stage?

Posted by: AnonAspirant | Oct 19, 2023 2:35:54 AM

If a committee has requested reference letters for a candidate (and presumably, other candidates), how long after that do they typically vote, and begin making offers?

Posted by: Anon | Oct 18, 2023 2:53:40 PM

Has anyone scheduled a screener with Catholic, yet? I don't see any notes in the spreadsheet, but I know that the spreadsheet is incomplete. Thanks!

Posted by: AnonAnon | Oct 17, 2023 10:30:27 AM


There again is no hard and fast rule. The dean may be gone and unable to make the call, or there may be some other reason to wait. I think, generally, calls go out the same day--sometimes good or bad. But not getting a call doesn't necessarily mean you're out.

Posted by: anon | Oct 16, 2023 10:17:24 AM

How long after the faculty vote will candidates be informed of the outcome? Is it a bad sign if you know they voted on Monday and two days later you have not heard anything?

Posted by: AnonCandidate | Oct 15, 2023 8:52:14 PM

We do it for all candidates in the pool. If if we think a candidate did poorly and there's a chance the committee might not put them forward for a vote, we still call references in case the faculty decide they'd like to have that candidate included.

Posted by: AnonHiringChair | Oct 13, 2023 1:20:47 PM

Do you contact references for multiple candidates under consideration or just the ones you intend to hire?

Posted by: Anon | Oct 13, 2023 12:48:16 PM

When we start contacting references, it just means that we're getting ready for the meeting where we'll vote on the candidates.

Posted by: AnonHiringChair | Oct 13, 2023 10:30:35 AM

AnonCommitteeMember | Oct 10, 2023 10:15:33 AM

Thanks for the insight. Does your school have separate committees for lateral and entry candidates? And if so, do you have different procedures for giving callbacks to lateral and entry candidates?

Posted by: Anon123 | Oct 13, 2023 10:17:09 AM

What's it mean if schools start contacting your references?

Posted by: Anon | Oct 12, 2023 10:32:12 PM

Another take about callback procedures: I can only speak as to schools where I have taught, and committees I have served on, but the usual practice I have seen is for entry-level callback decisions to be made together (in one batch) while lateral callback decisions are made on a rolling basis. But I wouldn't be surprised if this varies a lot.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Oct 12, 2023 5:47:21 PM

Re: callback procedures. I can only speak for my school (really only my committee), but we're hoping to hire a couple people this year at the entry level and a couple more laterals. We're moving through both groups now and have scheduled a mix of callbacks for this fall. However, we may not be done - we don't know how these visits will go, if we will lose candidates to other schools, etc. We are still conducting initial screeners (we've been doing them in small batches) and may do another round of callbacks after the winter break. This is why we haven't issued rejections - if someone had/has a screener with us, we genuinely haven't said no yet.
Other schools likely operate differently - they have a single line, in a specific subject area, will invite 3-4 people for that slot, and make one offer. But I hope this is helpful for understanding that some places have a different approach.

Posted by: AnonCommitteeMember | Oct 10, 2023 10:15:33 AM

A procedural question for committee members: do you typically send out all your callback invitations at once, or do they roll out over a period of time? It seems like screeners come in batches but I'm wondering if the same is true for callbacks.

Posted by: anon | Oct 5, 2023 1:54:06 PM

Another | Oct 5, 2023 11:20:04 AM

There is no answer to this question. It depends on how many interviews have taken place, what the school's priorities are, and when the faculty vote is scheduled. It could be within a week or more than a month. If you interviewed early, the school typically waits to interview all candidates for that slot, meaning a vote might not take place for at least 2-3 weeks.

Posted by: anon | Oct 5, 2023 12:09:20 PM

Question for any faculty member with knowledge: What would you estimate is the standard length of time it takes for a school to extend an offer after a callback interview? Two to three weeks? A month or more? I'm sure this will depend on many many factors and will thus vary case to case. But any general thoughts are appreciated!

Posted by: Another | Oct 5, 2023 11:20:04 AM

Just bumping

Posted by: Bump | Oct 3, 2023 12:01:42 PM

@anon: Ahh! I should have been more clear. I'm on the other side of this process, and the new jobs listing was posted today. That document is (afaik) just a big word file with all of the jobs ever listed included in it.

Posted by: Cross-Referencing | Sep 27, 2023 7:51:42 PM

"Why in the world do the subsequent FAR updates not indicate which listings are new? (Or, perhaps, if they do, why in the world am I not noticing the indications?)"

At the top of the page, there is a way to screen the results to deliver only the newest FAR applicants.

Posted by: Anon | Sep 27, 2023 5:55:15 PM

Why in the world do the subsequent FAR updates not indicate which listings are new? (Or, perhaps, if they do, why in the world am I not noticing the indications?)

Posted by: Cross-Referencing | Sep 27, 2023 2:36:18 PM

We don't affirmatively know who we're *not* hiring until we've (1) made our available offers; (2) had those offers accepted; and (3) know that we're not getting any additional lines from the university. We regularly return to the FAR after making an offer or two, to do some extra review (sometimes resulting in additional screeners and callbacks). And we've sometimes had an additional hiring line open up in the late fall or even spring, which often means essentially starting the process from the beginning (particularly when that line has subject matter or other restrictions attached to it).

This is all pretty typical. I hope it helps shine a light on why many schools don't send out a ton of rejections, particularly early in the process. It's not that we don't care enough about applicants to send a rejection; it's that we truly haven't rejected anyone yet.

Finally, we're pretty forthcoming with candidates -- particularly candidates who we've interviewed -- about their chances when it becomes pressing. This, too, is typical. If you've interviewed elsewhere and have an offer with a deadline, but you'd prefer us, it's accepted (/expected) that you would tell us about your deadline.

Posted by: anon committee member | Sep 26, 2023 2:59:40 PM

This will be very harsh, but enough is enough.

Dual appointment Professor here (law school and business school) on a top 50 university, and I am terribly disappointed that law schools treat candidates poorly. Why is it so hard to be fair and respectful?

For instance, some time ago I chaired one of our business school’s hiring committee. We had more than 90 applicants, and after the first round of screening we simply drafted a respectful email and asked our admin assistant to email it to those who didn’t get a screening. Most of you also have an admin assistant, what is the big deal to let people know where they stand? I understand you want to “keep options open”, but grow up and act professionally, you make a decision and you go with it. Treat people with respect, it’s their life and their careers. I just heard two days ago from a colleague who interviewed for a screening with a law school as a lateral and one of the faculty members had a sleeveless shirt on (Brooklyn, I’m talking about you!). I mean, really? I understand you do it from home, but show some respect to the people you meet with and put a dress shirt on.

Most law schools don’t pay well enough already, this is also why you see less applications to be a law professor, but that’s not the only reason, another reason is that many law schools treat people poorly. Stop this. Don’t be a part of the problem. This isn’t Skadden, Cravath, or Kirkland. It’s academia. You don’t pay enough to treat people this way and still get the best people to join you. No need to treat people this way.

You work hard and think you don’t have time to send updates to candidates? Well, that’s life, sometime work is really hard and time consuming. But it’s just an cause for you to treat people poorly, because you don’t care enough about the candidates life and careers.

Bottom line, many of you walk around campus feeling high and mighty, but you have no reason for that. You can learn a lot from other colleges and try to be more academia and less industry.

Also, sorry for the typos, it’s early.

Posted by: ProfessorMad | Sep 26, 2023 9:37:06 AM

Most law schools are pretty terrible at letting candidates know their status. For the most part, the reason is that it's uncomfortable for committees to give bad news, and committee members are doing this as an "extra" rather than as their jobs. An additional reason that is more legitimate is that sometimes schools aren't sure whether to move on a candidate. Any one person may be in the "don't move" pile right now, but changing considerations may shift them into the "do move" pile next week, and schools don't want to call up a candidate they already dinged and say, "actually, we changed our mind."

For both of these reasons, silence becomes the default. But yes, it's frustrating. I had a first round interview with Georgetown in the fall of 2000, and I still haven't heard anything. I thought of following up and asking them if they have made a decision on me, but then I don't remember who was on the committee then and the chair from 2000-01 is probably retired by now.

Schools really should let everyone know their timing, and post on a public website what stage of the process they are currently undergoing. That way there is as much transparency as possible. But schools are terrible at this, unfortunately.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Sep 26, 2023 3:09:18 AM

I would also add that in the wardman park days, it was pretty obvious you didn't get a screener because the physical conference was happening and you never heard. Since we don't have the AALS conference anymore, it would be nice if committee chairs perhaps emailed candidates (even a group email or post here) that they have evaluated the AALS book and decided not to proceed or post here you are done with screeners. But law schools get use to doing things a certain way, so since rejections before screeners were hardly ever done in wardman park days, I doubt many schools are going to affirmatively change there habits and email rejections now. Schools are also on different timelines, so many schools might just be getting started now.

Posted by: anon | Sep 26, 2023 12:43:52 AM

I think it's way too early to affirmatively email places on updates. You really should reserve updates for when you need to know - you are about to accept another offer or maybe even if you have call backs arranged and you might cancel some of the callbacks you have scheduled if you got that school. If the only reason you want to know is to satisfy your curiosity and you have no new info to impart, I think it would seem weird to email for an update, especially in the pre-screener stage.

For the most part, if the committee is finished making decisions, silence is your answer -you didn't get a screener. This board has been pretty good about letting people know whether committees have started handing out callbacks. But if you want to know whether they are finished yet - I don't think the committee chairs would be really ready to say so this early - many schools want to keep options open, so you probably won't get a direct answer - they would likely just tell you "we are in the process" of doing screeners to keep options open.

Many schools never tell you anything. I didn't even get rejections on CALLBACKS sometimes when I flew to the school, went out to dinner and interviewed with 10 people. It's not like the school is going to forget to call you if you got an offer or they want to schedule a callback so little really is accomplished to email the hiring chair unless there is a pressing need or you have info to share. In the wardman park days, they were pretty good about telling you that you didn't get a callback after a screener, but even then, many schools did not do so for over a month. And if you were not picked for even a screener, I hardly ever got rejections- sometimes I would get an auto rejection months later in the spring if I applied on the school's HR website. But hardly any schools ever wrote me that I didn't get a screener - I think one school wrote me a letter in the mail one time that I did not get picked for a screener.

Posted by: anon | Sep 26, 2023 12:30:46 AM

On etiquette:

Would it be a good idea to contact the Chair or members of a hiring committee to determine whether one's candidacy has been assessed but not proceeded upon?


Simple. Committees don't typically send thanks but no thanks emails. A candidate may potentially wait months with accompanying anxiety with respect to an invite that may never come. If institutions are serious about commitments to mental health, ding notifications should be sent the moment that decision is taken. Or at the very least, it should not be inappropriate to contact committee members or chairs for an update. It's not pushy if respectfully phrases and again appreciating the anguish many applicants feel throughout the process.


Posted by: InquiringMind | Sep 25, 2023 9:13:38 PM

Anyone received callbacks from Belmont, Samford, or Albany Law School? Thanks!

Posted by: anon | Sep 23, 2023 7:44:24 AM

Did anyone hear from Oregon or Ole Miss?

Posted by: LateralAnon | Sep 15, 2023 8:31:58 AM

Is there a common practice of sending update emails? I have a new publication and was wondering whether I should mention that to universities to which I sent direct applications but have not invited me (yet) to screening interviews

Posted by: anoncandidate | Sep 14, 2023 11:56:19 AM

@Idiosyncratic: I'm a fellow candidate, but I'd suspect that many schools (perhaps a minority, but a good number) have not yet extended screener invitations. And I suspect that some schools that have done so will extend more in the coming weeks. Anecdotally, when I sent some updated materials to several schools recently, a couple of hiring chairs suggested in their acknowledgement emails that they're still reviewing applications. So, take heart; we're still relatively early in the process.

Posted by: AnonC | Sep 13, 2023 3:45:58 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.