Search the Lounge


« Arizona's BA in Law | Main | 2013 Law School Employment By Quartile - Moody's Methodology »

May 08, 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Moody's should take note that Georgetown pays $12,000 per year for its many school funded positions - less than minimum wage for 35 hours per week.


(Please note this comment is a "re-tread" placed under both this Top 25 and subsequent post with full first quartile listing.)

Thanks for taking the time to crunch (or have crunched) all the numbers.

It seems that while showing aggregated quartiles per Moody's method provides a nice visual way to get the point across that outcomes vary considerably depending on which "chunk" you're looking at, once you begin looking at individual schools the "most everything goes into the pot" aspect of Moody's method really runs the hazard of being significantly misleading.

Emory is a very good example of this - top 5 using this method as you demonstrate in your chart above. But as you also mention, this includes school-funded jobs.

Emory has 67 grads in such jobs - nearly a quarter (23.7%) of what otherwise looks like a truly wonderful ~ 97% JD/JDA placement rate.

What happens to those 67 school-funded jobs next year? Those actually at the school (library, CSO, other administrivial tasks) are certainly gone next year to make way for the next wave of unemployed graduates needing a position. To the extent that Emory's school-funded jobs may be funded jobs in industry/firms/other, perhaps those will turn into real jobs.

But I don't know whether any, or if any, how many of Emory's school-funded jobs are jobs outside of the school itself.


I was impressed that Moody's noted what a fantastic time it is to enroll in law school, given that there will be a shortage of law grads in just two years. This shortage will likely lead to diminishing "deals" to stimulate attendance and increased revenues for law schools, turning this whole problem around!!!!

Oh, wait, Moody's didn't say anything like that. Au contrair, mon ami.

But then again, when presented with facts, from true experts, JDs comfortably ensconced in legal academia who are pretending to be labor economists claim to know better and simply repeat, over and over, that everyone who dares to disagree has no facts and is wrong-headed (and worse).


Agreed, anon. I've noticed that Ben is now demanding proof of everything - that is, everything *others* say; he hasn't responded to requests to back up his statements.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad