Bar-Admission Required, Full-Time, Long-Term: First Look

The ABA recently reported that 56.2% of the 2012 graduates from ABA-approved law schools were employed in full-time, long-term positions required admission to the Bar.

According to my analysis of the data for the Class of 2012, for graduates of the 197 reporting law schools located in the continental United States, 56.9% were employed in such positions. As you might expect, those graduates are not equally distributed across those law schools. The employment rates at those schools ranged from a low of 21.5% to a high of 94.5%. The 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles were

25th	50th	75th
46.7%	54.8%	66.2%

The following chart shows the distribution of law-school employment rates in full-time, long term positions with Bar-admission required:

Only 20 schools reported employment rates for such positions that were above 75%.

Class of 2012 ABA Employment Report Reported Employment Rates Full-Time, Long-Term, Bar Admission Required
Rank	School	Rate
1	University of Chicago	94.9%
2	University of Virginia	94.5%
3	University of Pennsylvania	94.4%
4	Columbia University	93.4%
5	Stanford University	91.2%
6	New York University	91.1%
7	Harvard University	87.3%
8	University of California-Berkeley	85.9%
9	Cornell University	85.8%
10	Duke University	85.3%
11	University of California-Irvine	83.9%
12	University of Michigan	82.5%
13	Yale University	82.0%
14	George Washington University	81.0%
15	University of Alabama	77.3%
16	West Virginia University	76.8%
17	Louisiana State University	76.7%
18	Northwestern University	76.3%
19	University of Texas	75.9%
20	Southern Methodist University	75.1%

 posted by Gary Rosin

Comments

[Anon]

These numbers can be a bit misleading without salary data. Most students I know would take a $100K JD-Advantage job over a 50K JD-Required. Also, how are schools determining whether the JD is required? This seems open to manipulation by just asking employers to require a JD, or at least say it is an advantage.

[Kevin Outterson]

Consider revising this chart for school funding. For example, 128 of the GW grads were school funded in full time, long term jobs (how is that possible?). That's 22% of the class. Back them out, and GW falls from 81% to 59% employed FT JD Req/Pref.

Many schools have funded post-grad fellowship positions, including BU, and for many of these students they gain valuable experience and eventually a full time job. But many schools reported these positions as short term, not long term.

The ABA needs very clear guidelines on how school & university funded positions are reported. For example, it would be good to know how schools with "law firms" are reporting these specific students and how school supported fellowships can be "long term."

[Ann Bartow]

How can a law school have substantially more graduates in clerkships than it does in short term positions? What am I missing?

[Anon]

According to the ABA: "A short-term position is one that has a definite term of less than one year. Thus, a clerkship that has a definite term of one year or more is not a short-term position."

In other words, the ABA considers most clerkships to be long-term employment.

[Anon]

To expand on this:

"1) Employed – Bar Passage Required. A position in this category requires the graduate to pass a bar exam and to be licensed to practice law in one or more jurisdictions. . .Judicial clerkships are also included in this category."

"Long-term. A long-term position is one that does not have a definite or indefinite term of less than one year. It may have a definite length of time as long as the time is one year or longer."

So, clerkships are included in "long-term employment requiring bar passage," whether that makes sense or not.