The job market for lawyers in the United States may be heading the way of the academic job market in the humanities, The Wall Street Journal reports (subscription may be required).
Except for graduates of elite law schools, …
the majority of law-school graduates are suffering from a supply-and-demand imbalance that’s suppressing pay and job growth. The result: Graduates who don’t score at the top of their class are struggling to find well-paying jobs to make payments on law-school debts that can exceed $100,000. Some are taking temporary contract work, reviewing documents for as little as $20 an hour, without benefits. And many are blaming their law schools for failing to warn them about the dark side of the job market.
Follow On Hiring through your favorite RSS reader:
9 Responses to Sound Familiar?
Guest - October 4, 2011 at 2:05 am
Greetings from California. My department has been involved in discussions about this for a while now. My admittedly unpopular view is that assessment is good if it forces faculty to have a conversation about what we are supposed to be doing. As a junior fac sometimes I feel like things are unclear, and when things are unclear, often nepotism and the good old boys network kick in. Assessment standardizes and gives junior faculty demonstrable right and left limits, so the rules aren’t unwritten anymore. That’s good for equal treatment in the end.
11179102 - October 4, 2011 at 8:43 am
Through this article, one can see why tenure is dying – and faculty will eventually lead the way in its demise. It will be much easier to sign a contract with clearly defined expectations and success measures than to accept a tenure-track position with murky standards that will be enforced by a tenure committee not yet formed via a subjective tenure review process.
The uncertainty of the tenure process (regardless of written tenure policies) make clearly defined teaching and research contracts more attractive. Administrative leadership will prefer contracts so that the institution can better address future financial and economic crises. Faculty will come to prefer the clarity and legal protection employment contracts offer.
This is one way the new assessment environment can be turned to a faculty member’s professional benefit and personal well-being and sanity.
gdevanney - October 4, 2011 at 9:17 am
RIght on the money! Regardless of how you feel about institutional assessment initiatives, it is a fact that many faculty are unprepared and ignorant of many assessment processes and that they often receive little to no professional development in the field and (surprise!) are tasked with developing the procedures, documentation and reports that are submitted to accrediting bodies.
Institutions need to support their faculty by providing them the tools to do the job and this includes the support, training, and budget! Or find another way to get the job done.
missoularedhead - October 4, 2011 at 11:32 am
Is perhaps part of the issue here that the various groups (stakeholders…always have visions of bad vampire movies with that one) don’t speak the same language? Because I know that until I arrived at my most recent adjunct gig, I had no idea what ‘assessment’ really was. When someone finally took the time to explain it, I could then articulate what it was I was doing that counted as ‘assessment’. Learning outcomes are different from course objectives, apparently (at least here). Who knew?
jimdilly - October 4, 2011 at 2:32 pm
“I don’t think there is any going back on this trend of data collection and reporting. That argument is done.”
Yes, despite no proof that doing so will have any substantive result in solving the problems identified as the cause for the collection. THAT is the problem. The snake-oil salesmen have peddled their panacea and we are buying by the truckloads. However, in ten years we will be no closer to ‘fixing’ whatever it is we think is broken, and we will have nothing to show for it than reams/servers full of data that overwhelm us with discrete knowledge that do not add up to a coherent whole, and never will.
There are only two ways to prove if teaching (or an education/training) has been effective, and these are only relevant for two types of education: 1) in a liberal arts education, the proof is if the students become good, ethical, contributing citizens to society, and 2) for professional education (i.e. carpenter, lawyer, graphic designer) the proof is not only found in whether they are employed or not—a great many deserving folks do not have jobs because there simply are none—but also in their actual skills in the profession, and these skills manifest themselves in innumerable ways. Schools need to be clear and straightforward about which of those two they are doing, and would be fools to say “we are here to get you a job.” Schools exist to educate, not to guarantee. Schools cannot jump start an economy that is besotted with anachronistic mechanisms and a gambling philosophy. Measuring, collecting, and accrediting do nothing but form a tautology to justify their own processes.
In that sense, then, they are perfect for a culture that has lived on the fumes of a consumerist society; we created an economy that exists only to consume itself.
pleasethink - October 4, 2011 at 3:32 pm
I suspect many faculty are not adverse to the concept of outcomes assessment and fully understand the desire of funding agencies, administrators, and students for evidence that faculty are doing their jobs. However, and it’s a big however, there are enormously serious problems with outcomes assessment that are very difficult to address adequately. Perhaps the biggest is that requiring me to do assessment – in the form that the administrators and accrediting agencies demand – REDUCES my ability to do my job in a very significant way. I only have so many hours in a day, and spending additional hours on assessment means I have less time for teaching and research. This is the primary reason I personally oppose assessment.
As an example, I give short answer tests in my classes. With these, I can very easily provide proof of student learning. But the assessment agencies and administrators don’t want this high-quality objective data, they want something simpler like summary scores on multiple choice tests, despite the clear evidence that such tests are vastly inferior and have essentially no external usefulness (when was the last time YOU had to do a multiple choice test in your work?). Further, they want ALL sections of the course I teach to be identical, or at least to cover the same material (to the same extent) so that all students have exactly the same ability to complete that multiple choice test (as if that’s possible). So now I need to standardize my course (i.e., dumb it down) to conform to the standards my colleagues use (i.e., less effective pedagogical methods), eliminate areas in which I have far greater expertise than my colleagues and vice versa, so that I can convince outsiders I’m doing a great job. Then, I’m supposed to take this simplistic data, from a single course or semester, aggregating my results and those of other instructors (and sometimes from other courses), and make changes to my courses based on those numbers. And people wonder why faculty are upset? Let’s let everyone who has no clue dictate to experts how they should do their jobs… (And whatever happened to faith in market forces? If someone doubts a given person or institution’s ability to teach, let him or her go elsewhere – another section of the course or another university).
As behavioral social scientists, we would NEVER accept the kinds of assessment evidence that are being demanded by people who are almost completely uneducated in social science research methods and the many problems that limit the validity of various types of data. We’re trained to recognize the many reasons that make such data worthless, but rather than fight back and educate the masses (i.e., do our jobs educating them), we’re acquiescing in the mistaken notion that it’ll be easier, and because we don’t want to be seen as complaining or giving up our power [because none of us actually wants to do our jobs, right?]). Think of the huge amount of random noise that is in that data – data that will be used to dictate changes in our curricula and will help decide our futures. Many of these problems are well-recognized in the debacle of ranking institutions (“The Top 100 Colleges”) – and consider the staggering costs universities now pay to play games with those almost meaningless numbers, at the expense of their mission of educating students.
Then consider the issue of student motivation. While many faculty work hard to motivate their students, the reality is that some students could care less about learning and working hard to fulfill course demands (vs. partying, earning money on their jobs, having fun, dealing with illnesses, caring for their families, etc). Many such students really aren’t prepared for university demands, and are truly wasting their money, although universities are happy to admit them and take their tuition, and then want to judge faculty based on student performance as if that was under their control.
Most faculty assess student learning ALL THE TIME, in the form of tests and assignments. We assign grades based on our inevitably idiosyncratic values, beliefs, and knowledge. But can I give a stack of graded assignments to provide evidence of learning? No, because that would make the job of the external agencies far too difficult. So instead they’re trying to make it our jobs, so that we get to spend our valuable and limited time dumbing down our classes, providing largely irrelevant numbers that pretend to assess learning, and translating high-quality data to far simpler yet wildly inaccurate summaries. It’s truly ridiculous, and will primarily serve to further erode the quality of education!
“Not everything that counts can be
counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.” (Sign hanging in
Einstein’s office at Princeton)
beckerw - October 5, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Without providing any empirical evidence, Lesboprof asserts “in most disciplines, save Education and a few other professional programs, scholarship on teaching isn’t very well respected . . . research on one’s teaching is an extra burden, on top of one’s own research agenda.” As Sue Becker and I discuss in “Potpourri: Reflections from Husband/Wife Academic Editors” American Economist (Forthcoming, Fall 2011), Pat Hutchings and Lee Shulman have wrongfully made similar statements to advance the Carnegie Foundation Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Although I do not want to speak for other disciplines, in our AE article we document that there are many economists at R1 universities who have built their careers doing empirical and theoretical research on teaching and learning in economics. We argue that it is the weak sisters and brothers with little or no background in quantitative areas in colleges of education, government bureaucracy and university management that are driving or going along with educational movements such as assessment and forcing out those who have demonstrated discipline-based methods of inquiry into educational issues.
William E. Becker
Professor Emeritus of Economics, Indiana University Adjunct Professor of Commerce, University of South Australia Research Fellow, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA, Bonn Germany) Fellow, Center for Economic Studies and Institute for Economic Research (CESifo, Munich Germany)
lesboprof - October 6, 2011 at 10:25 am
Dr. Becker:
I am very interested in your assertion regarding discipline-specific pedagogical research being rewarded in the academy. Perhaps it is because I am more recently through the tenure process at an R1 (admittedly not in economics) that my perspective differs from yours. I wonder if those scholars you mention would want to try to go up for tenure now based solely on research on teaching in the discipline. I would bet not. I have a background in one area of humanities, a social science, and a professional discipline, and in none of these would pedagogical research be respected or rewarded. Some of that is based on lack of grant funding in this area, which is the coin of the realm these days, and some based on people expecting a “serious research agenda.”
I actually do a good bit of research on teaching and learning, so please don’t read me as someone who supports this perspective. But I have also spent my career defending it.
Lesboprof
Sanders Marshall - October 9, 2011 at 4:39 pm
I really enjoyed your piece on a very important topic. The mentors have become lazy. The higher education expectations have become an insult to our generation. The people that have the power to mold minds want to make up excuses, but it doesn’t change the fact that they are trusted to have the passion to do their part in this whole mess. The outcome should be the proof on the questions at hand. A comment by a so called Dr. on this topic seems to be one sided and stubborn. I think that it is sad how people have become selfish and ignore the facts, just wanting something to bitch about because they probably believe that they are above and beyond. Like I stated, the proof should be the outcome. Those who just want to read what is put in front of them and not taking more interest or research it more are just lazy people that would rather throw out big words to defend themselves, but its not suppose to be about them. A man commented that the school should be clear on what side of the fence they are on, but what happened to shades of grey, inviduals and facts that are twisted for other peoples well being. Nobody wants to be a part of the solution. Truth be told any person that has a position that fits in this disscusion should not defend themselves, but defend those who are unable. Those people, kids, that this truly effects. Some of these rant, or comments, need to remember that they are in a rare position that should be based on passion for they have to offer. I understand the economy is not the educational systems desicion, but if you teach with passion instead of a paycheck, then maybe a diffference will show. Yes some students could careless, so find a way to relate, don’t just right it off as a lost cause. If a person feels that way than they should not teach, they should go to a mindless, selfish job. Its an important discussion that should lean on the minds that are being molded for the future. Todays economy might not be America’s present students future economy. There should be no question when it comes to a major issue like this one. I don’t agree that a person should even should try and say that a school is not responsible for promising a job to the higher educated, thats obvious that no school can promise that. if that is the foundation of their argument then get the hell out of the education system and be a lawyer or a insurance salesman. There are too many lazy excuses that are disguised with a sentence full of their knowledge of being a walking dictionary. I have news for you that disagree that it does not go in your favor just because you have a higher education, but no backbone or passion to make a difference where and when you can and do what you can about funding and yes finding a way to get to the students that they claim as a lost cause. Good piece David. you made a great statement to me once when you said that you didn’t want to limit your students from writting gritty subjects that is those kids life. I haven’t forgot that because that shows that you were able to break some tough barriers and seeing your students as individuals. Many kids and myself at that age need that. Its like a parent can’t blame their children for something that the parent is responsible for doing or lack of doing. Guidance and passion motivates what is really at stake. I know that my comment doesn’t have the runaround wording, but I personally think that you make a great points on the facts that cannot be overlooked or easliy excused.