A Cynical View of Law Firm Hiring Practice
This is, admittedly, a non-scientific, non-academic approach, but I want to pull together the various stories, impressions, and tall tales of the law firm hiring process, and see if I can make a few tentative predictions. I've been inspired by lectures from career services, my upcoming exams, and a brief glance at my current debt level, so this might be a little less optimistic than normal.
1900-1950: Although legal education remained the norm, some firms would still hire and train under an apprenticeship system. Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson (for whom the current Chief Justice clerked) was trained in that fashion. A student's performance in law school, however, remains determinative of his career prospects.
1995: For some time, rebellious theorists have questioned whether a third year of law school is necessary. 1L grades are determinative of students career prospects. Some students spend their summer after 1L year pursuing non-law interests. Whatever the theorists think, 3L year is still mandatory as either a restraint of trade or ritual formality.
2003: At least one admitted untrained theorist [1] wonders if the second year of law school is unnecessary. First semester 1L grades are determinative of job prospects for post-1L summers. 1L grades and 1L summer placements sort out 2L summer placements, and law firms choose from among 2L summer placements. 3L year remains necessary.
Which leads to my predictions:
2010: Enterprising law firms realize that a pedagogical system which does the vast majority of its ranking function in the first 16.5% of a three year course is probably testing extraneous factors--who's learned how the test system works in the first semester, instead of correcting exam-strategies after a dry run, for instance. Firms therefore begin asking for LSAT results and application essays. LSAC IPOs to great fanfare; BarBri exam courses end. 3L year remains as a restraint of trade or ritual formality.
The further future is indeterminate, but I predict one of two possible courses:
2040: Genetic testing has advanced, allowing law firms to test newborn babies for legal aptitude. After SATs, LSATs, IQ tests, or 1L exams, firms finally have a competitive measure in which 'test prep' is not a factor in success. (BarBri, however, begins offering hopeful parents Guides to Successful Legal Conception: What Are the Firm Test 'Positions'?) 1L year now a relaxed post-college sabattical. 3L year remains as a ritual formality.
or...:
2040: Rising numbers of applicants, broader grade curves, and more compressed time schedules lead law firms to conclude that using 3rd grade aptitude tests have the same problems as SATs, LSATs, or 1L exams when Kaplan enters the test prep market in a marketing alliance with Barney. Realizing that they're doing most of the black-letter law education themselves, law firms complete their circle by hiring legal apprentices based upon a holistic interview process. Very faint peals of laughter are heard over the grave of Justice Robert Jackson...
[1] Yours truly.








Comments
Hey, don't you have work to do? Enough with this thinking already!
;-)
gbhhqPosted by: Alison | November 30, 2003 04:10 PM
I expect that your predictions here are going to prove to be quite accurate.
:-)
opezduPosted by: Len Cleavelin | November 30, 2003 04:57 PM
that was pretty idiotic
Posted by: your classmate | December 1, 2003 08:09 PM
I always love criticism that insightful, informative, and anonymous. Eye rolls all around, folks?
khdpksyPosted by: A. Rickey | December 1, 2003 10:25 PM
Ah what's the expression. If you can't say anything nice...
become a lawyer ;-)
More seriously this reminded me of an old classmate from China who's company help people prepare for Chinese law exams. In China all you need to do to become a lawyer is pass the exam, doesn't matter how you train or where. I certainly see something like that combined with modern apprenticeships making a comeback in some way.
M
eewuPosted by: martin | December 2, 2003 06:22 AM
Interesting. You get 1L 1st semester grades? At my school (admittedly far less prestigious), the core 1L courses (Torts, Contracts, Property, Civil Procedure) are a full year long, and you get one grade for both fall and spring semesters in July after your first year.
hywoksuPosted by: Richard Campbell | December 2, 2003 07:25 AM
On the apprenticeship front, check out this arrangement:
http://ernieattorney.typepad.com/ernie_the_attorney/roosevelt_letter/Franklin%20Roosevelt%20law%20clerk%20letter.pdf
yffmyciPosted by: Dave | December 3, 2003 05:39 PM
On the apprenticeship front, check out this arrangement:
http://ernieattorney.typepad.com/ernie_the_attorney/roosevelt_letter/Franklin%20Roosevelt%20law%20clerk%20letter.pdf
Posted by: Dave | December 3, 2003 05:39 PM
I can't decide if that's depressing or just short cited. Two possible approaches, law schools can do away with the grade curve, lets face it almost every student scores within fractions of points of each other. (We're all masochistic work-aholics who preffer endless hours of tortured reading and the constant criticism over self-flafilation.) But the fact of the matter is, every student who graduates from a top ranked law school is equally qualified to practice law regardless of whether or not they received Dean's honors.
Law firms could embrace this humorous notion of holistic interviewing... Or, law students who don't like it, and are realistic enough to know that the hiring process is reflective of the entire business method can admit to themselves that perhaps a firm career isn't the right choice, and put their law degrees to other uses within the field of law.
And, for those who really don't like it, you can exert pressure on your school from within and without to change it's policy. Remember, you are the one who will later be called on for donations, endorsments, law review articles, and interviewing and hiring of later students. Most top tier schools have enough "branding" history that doing away with grading or ranking of students will not have a seriously adverse affect on law firms willingness to hire graduates (of course they would have to embrace the "holistic interviewing") Still, I think it's safe to say that the value of a law degree would not be seriously depleted if this approach were taken.
dcwovuePosted by: Marjorie | April 9, 2004 01:39 PM