|
Post-law school employment in the United States reflects the degree to which students who obtain a law degree after attending law school in the United States are able to find employment, and specifically able to find employment in the legal profession or another area relevant to the degree. Because of the high cost of attending law school, the ability of graduates to find employment that pays well enough to recoup that cost is a concern to prospective law students. In some cases, law schools have been criticized for allegedly misrepresenting the difficulty of finding employment. ==Employment statistics and salary information== According to the Employment Summary Report prepared by the ABA's Section on Legal Education, around 85% of recent law graduates were employed 9 months after graduation, but only 57% of U.S. law school graduates who graduated in May 2013 were employed in full-time, long term positions that required a law degree.〔 This is consistent with findings in Professor Simkovic and McIntyre's study of U.S. Census Bureau data, which found that 40 percent of law school graduates do not practice law. However, Professor Simkovic & McIntyre's study found that law graduates who do not practice law still derive substantial benefits from their law degrees—specifically, they earn more and are more likely to be employed than they likely would have been had they never attended law school. Unemployment and underemployment rates are higher for similar undergraduates than for law graduates. Long term earnings data is available from the U.S. Census Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation, a nationally representative survey first used to measure law degree holder earnings premiums in a widely cited study by Simkovic and McIntyre.〔(The Economic Value of a Law Degree ), 43 J. Legal Stud. 249 (2014)〕 The ''National Law Journal'' also compiles employment informationtracking the proportion of recent graduates working in the 250 largest law firms in the country.〔(National Law Journal To Go to Law School rankings )〕 Brian Tamanaha, a law professor and legal theorist at Washington University, has questioned the accuracy of employment statistics provided by some law schools.〔(Brian Tamanaha, ''Failing Law Schools'' ), University of Chicago Press, 2012〕 He notes that employment and salary information provided by law schools is based on surveys of recent graduates. This information is consolidated and made available by the American Bar Association.〔http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/〕 In his book entitled "Failing Law Schools," Tamanaha concludes that because of the debt loads and job prospects facing law graduates, "Many law professors at many law schools across the country are selling a degree to their students that they would not recommend to people close to them."〔Tamanaha, Brian Z. (2012-06-18). Failing Law Schools (Chicago Series in Law and Society) (Kindle Locations 3413-3414). University of Chicago Press. Kindle Edition.〕 Labor Economist Frank McIntyre and Michael Simkovic criticized Professor Tamanaha's research, noting it had factual errors, misleading and selective citations to sources that contradicted the proposition for which Tamanaha cited them, and inappropriate and misleading uses of data.〔Michael Simkovic & Frank McIntyre, Populist Outrage, Reckless Empirics: A Review of Failing Law Schools, Northwestern University Law Review, Feb. 3, 2014, http://colloquy.law.northwestern.edu/main/2014/02/populist-outrage-reckless-empirics.html〕 However, Simkovic and McIntyre praised Tamanaha for his lively writing style and creative policy proposals. Following these revelations, Professor Brian Leiter of the University of Chicago—an early supporter of Tamanaha—withdrew his endorsement of Professor Tamanaha's research and criticized Tamanaha's work as "badly confused."〔http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leiter/2013/07/the-economic-value-of-a-law-degree-redux-1-1.html〕 Professor Tamanaha complained that Leiter was trying to "destroy" his reputation and "grind his face into the dirt",〔http://balkin.blogspot.com/2013/07/leiters-contradictory-conclusion.html〕 but never responded to Simkovic & McIntyre's critical review of his research. The Washington Post criticized Tamanaha for falsely claiming that Simkovic & McIntyre's research only looked at average outcomes when it in fact also considered outcomes for law students toward the bottom of the distribution and still found substantial benefits to legal education.〔http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/18/ignore-the-haters-law-school-is-totally-worth-the-cash/〕 Tamanaha subsequently conceded that he may have been overly focused on short term outcomes whereas Simkovic & McIntyre were looking at long term data.〔http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/07/tamanaha-3.html〕 However, in the same post, Tamanaha stated that "For two reasons, however, I continue to believe my short term analysis is more appropriate. First, the legal employment market remains very poor (even as the general economy has improved), and economists agree that people who enter job markets during down times suffer lower lifetime earnings. No one knows when the turn-around will happen and how strong the recovery will be--the people who entered law school in 2009 and 2010 betting that the job market would improve are now struggling. Second, as Simkovic and MacIntyre acknowledge, the risks differ by individual school."〔 Simkovic & McIntyre responded that Professor Tamanaha was confused about the current state of the employment market, which the data showed remained depressed outside of law, and that unambiguous and fundamental rules of valuation dictated that the long-term approach to valuation was the correct one.〔http://leiterlawschool.typepad.com/leiter/2013/08/the-economic-value-of-a-law-degree-correcting-misconceptions.html〕 Subsequent research by McIntyre and Simkovic using U.S. Census data and "back testing" investigated differences in earnings premiums between law school graduates graduating into strong and weak economies and found that over the course of a lifetime, the differences were too small to sway the decision about whether or not law school was a good financial investment.〔Frank McIntyre & Michael Simkovic, (Timing Law School (2015) )〕〔(Steven Davidoff Solomon, Law Schools and Industry Show Signs of Life, Despite Forecasts of Doom, N.Y. Times Dealbook, March 31, 2015 )〕〔Debra Cassens Weiss, (Why time law school? Value of law degree drops only $30K in bad vs. good economy, study says, ABA Journal, Mar. 10, 2015 )〕〔(Karen Sloan, Study: Law Grads’ Earning Advantage Seems Recession-Proof, The National Law Journal, March 10, 2015 )〕 Even for those graduating into high unemployment and close to the bottom of the earnings distribution, a law degree still typically provided greater benefits than it cost. The second Simkovic & McIntyre study also found that current unemployment does not predict future unemployment in 3 or 4 years when those currently entering law school would graduate.〔Michael Simkovic, (The Perils of Prediction, Brian Leiter's Law School Reports ), March 19, 2015〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Post-law school employment in the United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|