Of course, the most reasonable explanation for Drexel Law's ending its naming rights relationship this week isn't that Earle Mack has been spending his days hunched over a computer, looking at the school's statistics and becoming disillusioned with his namesake. It's far more likely that the school simply failed to continue cultivating the relationship with its donor. You can't just take the $30 million and run; you have to keep in touch with the benefactor. To be clear, I don't know that the school administration wasn't on the phone to Mack's secretary twice a week. But I do see that they don't have their own dedicated officer for institutional advancement. There's not even much outreach to alumni, from what I can see on the Events and Continuing Legal Education ("There are currently no scheduled Continuing Legal Education events") listings.
Here's something I notice looking at the make-up of the school's faculty and staff. Outside of administrative support, Drexel Law is run by ex-lawyers, law professors, and former court administrators. But what you don't see in the faculty and administration bios are individuals with a background in actual academic administration. Do law schools get tripped up with their own myth of the "fexible J.D."? Or has Drexel Law, at least, done so? You need professional academic administrators to run an academic institution.
You need institutional advancement professionals to maintain positive, long-term, fruitful relationships with past donors. It's way beyond having a little public ceremony to announce a gift. When there's a donor who gives $30 million to an organization, it needs to be a specific person's job to reach out to that person multiple times per year to check in, visit personally, chat them up over an expensive dinner, and explore the future of their contribution to the institution. A benefactor who is not cultivated will feel no reason to continue funding a gift, or to ever give again, or to suggest their past beneficiary to their rich friends.
It's not rocket science. It's Institutional Advancement 101, and it's based on what your mom was trying to teach you when she sat you down to write thank-you notes for your birthday presents.
But beyond the 101, this is an entire discipline. Practicing law for a few years doesn't prepare you for academic fundraising, even if you focused on tax law or served on a couple of non-profit boards. Never mind if you've been the ivory tower your entire career, or if you worked for the government. The organization has to hire actual professionals in the field of academic or nonprofit development.
Who knows what Drexel Law's development strategy is. Likely everything is channeled through the university's development office and they have little control over the big institutional advancement picture. But from where I'm sitting, it really looks as though someone at Drexel Law dropped the ball in this particular relationship, and that is a huge blunder.
Showing posts with label law school blues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law school blues. Show all posts
05 December 2013
04 December 2013
Drexel Law is Drexel Law again
Drexel University's law school, inaugurally known as its College of Law, then re-named after commercial real estate magnate Earle Mack, has now been re-re-named the Drexel University College of Law again. Tongues are being wagged; tweets are being tweeted; and a few alumni colleagues of mine have questions.
Didn't the alumni association just start an "@earlemackalumni.org" e-mail service?
The announcement said it was a financial decision considered mutually between Mack and the law school. But couldn't Mack simply liquidate some of his portfolio, or place it in the instrument funding the naming rights? He must have actively wanted his name off the school. Did the administration piss him off personally? Does he object to the new two-year J.D. scheme?
Is it Drexel Law's little bar passage problem? The declining gender and ethnic
diversity among its student population? The dropping U.S. News ranking?
Is there another sugar daddy waiting in the wings?
Does this mean all that swag and my diploma are collector's items, now?
One particularly cynical alumnus is predicting the imminent death of the law school, once the university decides to quit subsidizing it, not seeing a reasonable ROI on the perceived prestige of having a law school attached to it. I'm not sure I'd go that far. But I do think Drexel Law is apt to become eastern Pennsylvania's Duquesne -- the also-ran school in Pittsburgh that you can never recall when you try to list all the law schools in the Commonwealth, whose grads also seem to struggle a little with the bar exam, but out of which you can probably wrangle a job in a small firm or government in western or central Pennsylvania once you do pass, especially if you're Catholic.
Kind of like Villanova Law and employment in southeastern Pennsylvania. Burn!
So, will Drexel Law still exist in 10 years? Will they find a new buyer for the naming rights? Will anyone call the school by that name, or will it be like Temple Law, which nobody but the bumper stickers refers to as the Beasley School of Law?
Full e-mail sent to alumni under the cut:
Didn't the alumni association just start an "@earlemackalumni.org" e-mail service?
The announcement said it was a financial decision considered mutually between Mack and the law school. But couldn't Mack simply liquidate some of his portfolio, or place it in the instrument funding the naming rights? He must have actively wanted his name off the school. Did the administration piss him off personally? Does he object to the new two-year J.D. scheme?
Is it Drexel Law's little bar passage problem? The declining gender and ethnic
diversity among its student population? The dropping U.S. News ranking?
Is there another sugar daddy waiting in the wings?
Does this mean all that swag and my diploma are collector's items, now?
One particularly cynical alumnus is predicting the imminent death of the law school, once the university decides to quit subsidizing it, not seeing a reasonable ROI on the perceived prestige of having a law school attached to it. I'm not sure I'd go that far. But I do think Drexel Law is apt to become eastern Pennsylvania's Duquesne -- the also-ran school in Pittsburgh that you can never recall when you try to list all the law schools in the Commonwealth, whose grads also seem to struggle a little with the bar exam, but out of which you can probably wrangle a job in a small firm or government in western or central Pennsylvania once you do pass, especially if you're Catholic.
Kind of like Villanova Law and employment in southeastern Pennsylvania. Burn!
So, will Drexel Law still exist in 10 years? Will they find a new buyer for the naming rights? Will anyone call the school by that name, or will it be like Temple Law, which nobody but the bumper stickers refers to as the Beasley School of Law?
Full e-mail sent to alumni under the cut:
17 July 2012
Talking with new law students in the new no-law-jobs economy
I spent a few hours the other day talking to some students who are about to embark on their first year of law school. This wasn't the first "welcome the students" event I've ever attended, but it was the first one where I was very upfront about my employment situation. The question comes up all the time from these enthusiastic, bright-eyed young people, who see the next 3 years as just the merest obstacle between them and a personally fulfilling career pursuing justice for the oppressed or making big bucks in a prominent firm: "So, Glomarization, what kind of law do you practice?"
This time my answer was, plainly, "I'm underemployed in my solo practice doing [practice area] for [type of client], and I'm actively looking for a law firm job or employment in a different sector altogether. I get an interview about every other month, but mostly I'm not working as a lawyer, though I have a few volunteer gigs doing [REDACTED] that keep me busy."
One student gamely continued the conversation, talking about their interest in non-patent intellectual property (where there are absolutely no jobs outside of the non-hiring large law firms). I pointed out the jaw-droppingly low hiring rate for 2011 grads: only about 50% have full-time, permanent jobs where a J.D. is required, and some 15% have no job at all. That leaves about 35% who are working part-time, in temporary jobs (not necessarily clerkships, either), or in jobs where they don't need a piece of paper that cost $150,000 plus 3 years of unemployment. I said that I'm self-employed, but after a decade as a small business owner, I don't like being an entrepreneur. I went to law school so that I'd have a job at the other end of it. And not in an entitlement kind of way, but in an "I did this to better my life and I jumped through all your hoops, and now I find that there are no lawyering jobs, and my degree makes me less employable as a non-lawyer once people see the J.D. on my resume, what the fuck gives?" kind of way.
The student's response to this was something along the lines of, well, finding a job, it's all a matter of personality, really.
I can't talk to these people. They're operating from some different worldview, a completely different paradigm than I'm operating from. It's like when talking with a friend of mine from my undergraduate days who is an actual, real-life young-Earth creationist. Different paradigm. We cannot have a conversation when one of us sincerely, absolutely believes that the planet and the universe are literally younger than 10,000 years old. Our basic understandings of reality are irreconcilable, and it's the same between me and this shiny new law student I was speaking with. See, there's a 90% chance that the student will end up in the bottom 90% of their class -- but they will not allow that concept into their reality. Or if they will, they're assured that they'll beat that 50% employment figure anyway and that it's just a matter of personality as to whether they land a real lawyering job out of law school.
There's absolutely nothing I can say to this student. But I do promise that I won't say, "I told you so" to them 3 years from now, even though their comment was, at bottom, not very nice at all.
This time my answer was, plainly, "I'm underemployed in my solo practice doing [practice area] for [type of client], and I'm actively looking for a law firm job or employment in a different sector altogether. I get an interview about every other month, but mostly I'm not working as a lawyer, though I have a few volunteer gigs doing [REDACTED] that keep me busy."
One student gamely continued the conversation, talking about their interest in non-patent intellectual property (where there are absolutely no jobs outside of the non-hiring large law firms). I pointed out the jaw-droppingly low hiring rate for 2011 grads: only about 50% have full-time, permanent jobs where a J.D. is required, and some 15% have no job at all. That leaves about 35% who are working part-time, in temporary jobs (not necessarily clerkships, either), or in jobs where they don't need a piece of paper that cost $150,000 plus 3 years of unemployment. I said that I'm self-employed, but after a decade as a small business owner, I don't like being an entrepreneur. I went to law school so that I'd have a job at the other end of it. And not in an entitlement kind of way, but in an "I did this to better my life and I jumped through all your hoops, and now I find that there are no lawyering jobs, and my degree makes me less employable as a non-lawyer once people see the J.D. on my resume, what the fuck gives?" kind of way.
The student's response to this was something along the lines of, well, finding a job, it's all a matter of personality, really.
I can't talk to these people. They're operating from some different worldview, a completely different paradigm than I'm operating from. It's like when talking with a friend of mine from my undergraduate days who is an actual, real-life young-Earth creationist. Different paradigm. We cannot have a conversation when one of us sincerely, absolutely believes that the planet and the universe are literally younger than 10,000 years old. Our basic understandings of reality are irreconcilable, and it's the same between me and this shiny new law student I was speaking with. See, there's a 90% chance that the student will end up in the bottom 90% of their class -- but they will not allow that concept into their reality. Or if they will, they're assured that they'll beat that 50% employment figure anyway and that it's just a matter of personality as to whether they land a real lawyering job out of law school.
There's absolutely nothing I can say to this student. But I do promise that I won't say, "I told you so" to them 3 years from now, even though their comment was, at bottom, not very nice at all.
17 February 2011
Worst "fellowship" opportunity ever: Philadephia courts edition
So the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas (trial-level court in Pennsylvania) is offering a "fellowship" program to 2009 and 2010 law grads from Drexel, Penn, and Temple. The deal is that you do law clerking work for 20 hours a week, and in return you get . . . nothing. No pay, and no real assurance of a job anywhere in the court system afterward. The application materials don't even say how long the fellowship is supposed to last.
What if the judges threw a party but no one came? The original deadline for applications was this past Monday the 14th. It's been extended to 20 March, which indicates to me that I'm not the only person calling bullshit on this (1) no pay thing, and the (2) risk that this would be worse than an actual employment gap on a resume. Meaning, in a profession where you need to keep your doc review gigs off your resume or else BigLaw won't hire you, do you think this kind of unpaid fellowship will look much better? To the contrary, I bet it'll raise the same kind of "why couldn't you get a real job?" red flag that temp work raises -- even though that flag is ridiculous, and we all know it, because even very, very high performing students who graduated with me are stuck doing personal-injury grunt work (or doc review) now, since their 2L summer associateships didn't turn into offers.
Thirty-odd Philadelphia judges are looking for 40-odd "fellows." For some reason, they aren't looking for grads from Rutgers-Camden, Villanova, or Widener. I don't know why not. This "fellowship" looks like a 1L summer clerkship to me -- are they saying that these schools' grads aren't up to the work of a mid-performing law student who didn't score a summer post at Philly BigLaw? Or did their career offices call bullshit on the "opportunity," too?
What if the judges threw a party but no one came? The original deadline for applications was this past Monday the 14th. It's been extended to 20 March, which indicates to me that I'm not the only person calling bullshit on this (1) no pay thing, and the (2) risk that this would be worse than an actual employment gap on a resume. Meaning, in a profession where you need to keep your doc review gigs off your resume or else BigLaw won't hire you, do you think this kind of unpaid fellowship will look much better? To the contrary, I bet it'll raise the same kind of "why couldn't you get a real job?" red flag that temp work raises -- even though that flag is ridiculous, and we all know it, because even very, very high performing students who graduated with me are stuck doing personal-injury grunt work (or doc review) now, since their 2L summer associateships didn't turn into offers.
Thirty-odd Philadelphia judges are looking for 40-odd "fellows." For some reason, they aren't looking for grads from Rutgers-Camden, Villanova, or Widener. I don't know why not. This "fellowship" looks like a 1L summer clerkship to me -- are they saying that these schools' grads aren't up to the work of a mid-performing law student who didn't score a summer post at Philly BigLaw? Or did their career offices call bullshit on the "opportunity," too?
10 December 2010
My law firm is not seeking interns
A few days ago I got e-mail from someone who'd found my profile on a dating site I used to frequent. My profile indicates that I'm a second-career attorney currently building a two-person practice here in Philadelphia. This guy stumbled across my profile, said he was thinking of going to law school, and (1) wanted to hear my opinion about it, and (2) wondered if my firm was interested in taking on an intern.
I told him not to go to law school, for a lot of reasons, many if not all of which Above the Law touched upon a couple of days later in their discussion about the University of Delaware's preliminary plans for starting up a new law school down there in Newark. But before I answered the internship question, I looked at the guy's profile. In it, he indicated that he is currently in law school. I switched back to the message window and clicked "send" without addressing the question about an internship, and here's why.
1 - My firm is not looking for an intern, paid or otherwise.
2 - Even if my firm were looking for an intern, I wouldn't hire a candidate who approached me via a dating website rather than a networking website.
3 - Even if my firm were looking for an intern that we were willing to hire based on an inquiry via a dating website, we wouldn't hire someone who says in e-mail that he's considering going to law school, but who says in his profile that he is currently a law student. Though I bet checking his references would be good for a few giggles.
I told him not to go to law school, for a lot of reasons, many if not all of which Above the Law touched upon a couple of days later in their discussion about the University of Delaware's preliminary plans for starting up a new law school down there in Newark. But before I answered the internship question, I looked at the guy's profile. In it, he indicated that he is currently in law school. I switched back to the message window and clicked "send" without addressing the question about an internship, and here's why.
1 - My firm is not looking for an intern, paid or otherwise.
2 - Even if my firm were looking for an intern, I wouldn't hire a candidate who approached me via a dating website rather than a networking website.
3 - Even if my firm were looking for an intern that we were willing to hire based on an inquiry via a dating website, we wouldn't hire someone who says in e-mail that he's considering going to law school, but who says in his profile that he is currently a law student. Though I bet checking his references would be good for a few giggles.
08 October 2009
Glomarization, almost-Esq.
Results from July's Pennsylvania bar exam are out, and I passed!
About 1 more month until I hear whether I'm admitted to the Commonwealth's bar.
About 1 more month until I hear whether I'm admitted to the Commonwealth's bar.
01 October 2009
Bar exam results in a week?
Word on the street is that the July Pennsylvania bar exam results will be posted next Friday.
15 September 2009
"Awesome" offer rates to Philly summer associates
The Above the Law blog writes about job offer rates to Philadelphia summer associates:
The math isn't hard, even for lawyers. Drinker Biddle, according the article, offered employment to 13 of 19 summer 2009 associates. That's 68% -- but it's still only 13 people. (And note that they reportedly laid off about 20 people last December, anyway.) If only they'd taken on a smaller class to begin with! If they'd recruited, say, 15 summer associates, their 87% offer rate would have beaten everybody else's in town!
The better question is, what was the flat number of offers given to Drinker Biddle's 2008 summer associates? Google isn't helpful, but something tells me it was more than 13.
[A] 75% offer rate in Philadelphia sounds awesome.Huh? Not if the numbers are skewed because firms had taken on smaller classes of summer associates the first place, it doesn't.
The math isn't hard, even for lawyers. Drinker Biddle, according the article, offered employment to 13 of 19 summer 2009 associates. That's 68% -- but it's still only 13 people. (And note that they reportedly laid off about 20 people last December, anyway.) If only they'd taken on a smaller class to begin with! If they'd recruited, say, 15 summer associates, their 87% offer rate would have beaten everybody else's in town!
The better question is, what was the flat number of offers given to Drinker Biddle's 2008 summer associates? Google isn't helpful, but something tells me it was more than 13.
29 July 2009
Day 2
And so, the morning after a relaxing evening with friends, day 2 of the Pennsylvania bar exam.
25 July 2009
Bar exam home stretch
About a week and a half ago I came to the conclusion that, if I really thought in my heart that I didn't have a good shot at passing the bar exam, I would have quit studying by now.
This afternoon I'll be heading out to a friend's garden party. Take that to mean what you will.
This afternoon I'll be heading out to a friend's garden party. Take that to mean what you will.
16 July 2009
Even the ACS figures I'm going to fail the bar exam
From the mailbox:
Actually, to tell the truth, I'm making it a game-day decision whether I go to Driberally that night.
To: Glomarization(Emphasis mine.) Tuesday 28 July is day 1 of the Pennsylvania bar exam.
From: events@acslaw.org
Subject: ACS PHILADELPHIA ANNOUNCEMENT: Happy Hour, presented by the Philadelphia Chapter of the American Constitution Society
The Philadelphia Chapter of the American Constitution Society and the
Center City Chapter of Drinking Liberally present a:
Happy Hour
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
6:00 p.m.
Triumph Brewing Company
117 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA
Actually, to tell the truth, I'm making it a game-day decision whether I go to Driberally that night.
02 July 2009
If I had an iPod I would be listening to this constantly
There's nothing to the video at all; just listen:
01 July 2009
If I took the bar exam today, I wouldn't pass it
To tell the truth, about the only thing carrying me through bar exam prep at the moment is my personal acquaintance with at least one deeply stupid, socially dysfunctional knucklehead who passed the Pennsylvania bar successfully on the first try (recently, after they made the exam harder than it used to be).
Further details about Knucklehead, Esq., omitted, though I'm almost certain they don't read this blog.
I'm happy that I still have a month before the bar exam. I wish I had more than a month, even though I've been keeping up with the assignment schedule -- and the housework, surprisingly.
But enough whining. Time to head off again to the bar prep salt mines. I really, really don't want to have to take this lousy exam twice.
Further details about Knucklehead, Esq., omitted, though I'm almost certain they don't read this blog.
I'm happy that I still have a month before the bar exam. I wish I had more than a month, even though I've been keeping up with the assignment schedule -- and the housework, surprisingly.
But enough whining. Time to head off again to the bar prep salt mines. I really, really don't want to have to take this lousy exam twice.
27 June 2009
Classes I'm glad I took in law school
Classes I'm glad I took in law school, so that I'm not looking at the material now for the very first time:
Because, really, that's the only reason anyone goes to law school: to be able to tell people what to do when they get pulled over for speeding but there's a nickel bag in their pocket, or whether they should go ahead and declare bankruptcy, or explain the finer distinctions between warrantless wiretapping, legal eavesdropping, pinhole video surveillance, and closed-circuit security cameras.
Does anyone even say nickel bag any more?
- 1st Amendment
- Employment Discrimination
- an upper-level contracts course
- 1st Amendment
- Corporations, Partnerships, Agency Law
- Trusts and Estates
- 1st Amendment
- Entertainment Law (invasion of privacy torts)
- did I mention 1st Amendment?
Because, really, that's the only reason anyone goes to law school: to be able to tell people what to do when they get pulled over for speeding but there's a nickel bag in their pocket, or whether they should go ahead and declare bankruptcy, or explain the finer distinctions between warrantless wiretapping, legal eavesdropping, pinhole video surveillance, and closed-circuit security cameras.
Does anyone even say nickel bag any more?
22 June 2009
Bar exam study notes to self
A preliminary list of things I've learned while studying for the bar exam:
- Don't sign over the deed to your house to someone and then toss the document in a desk drawer. Unless you don't like your heirs and you're trying to cause them problems.
- When you buy some real estate, get insurance on the property that takes effect upon signing the contract of sale -- don't wait until closing. You're just inviting a month's worth of arsonists, earthquakes, and tidal waves.
- When 2 neighbors are talking by the fence, the one who thinks he should win loses.
- Get it in writing and "record," whatever that means.
- Don't sign over the deed to your house to someone and then toss the document in a desk drawer. Unless you don't like your heirs and you're trying to cause them problems.
- When you buy some real estate, get insurance on the property that takes effect upon signing the contract of sale -- don't wait until closing. You're just inviting a month's worth of arsonists, earthquakes, and tidal waves.
- When 2 neighbors are talking by the fence, the one who thinks he should win loses.
- Get it in writing and "record," whatever that means.
15 June 2009
I got nothin'
I got nothin'. Just spending my days in bar prep, my evenings in housework, and the occasional nights out with friends.
I'll be more interesting -- or at least less uninteresting -- after the end of July.
Carry on.
I'll be more interesting -- or at least less uninteresting -- after the end of July.
Carry on.
03 June 2009
Profoundness: on the avalanche of work
It is devilishly hard for me to keep up with lectures, readings, and practice tests for the bar exam when you people insist on continuing to update your blogs.
Also, I haven't worked this hard since the first few months of my 1L year. I am out of practice.
Also, I haven't worked this hard since the first few months of my 1L year. I am out of practice.
01 June 2009
Profoundness: on post-graduate education
It's days like this when I wish I'd gone to med school, rather than law school. What better way to put my money where my mouth is than to become an abortion practitioner? It's not like I'll ever be actually litigating abortion questions -- that kind of stuff is left to the top grads of the top schools, not to chumps like me.
24 May 2009
That's Glomarization, J.D., thank you
It's been 3 real fun years of hard work, but I'm about due for a vacation:
10 March 2009
Attorney lay-offs in town
Morgan Lewis has laid off 55 attorneys and 160+ support staff, and they're deferring this year's new-graduate hires not to January 2010 but to October 2010. But let's be clear: this isn't "deferral"; this is "no new hires for 1 year." (Inky).
Holy moley.
The Inky article states that Morgan Lewis did not clarify how many of the 55 and 160+ have been let go from the Philly office; Morgan Lewis has offices around the country.
The deferees can ask for a $5K/month stipend if they get public-interest work. Great! More competition for me, who wouldn't have been a candidate for the Morgan Lewis types of firms in the first place.
Holy moley.
The Inky article states that Morgan Lewis did not clarify how many of the 55 and 160+ have been let go from the Philly office; Morgan Lewis has offices around the country.
The deferees can ask for a $5K/month stipend if they get public-interest work. Great! More competition for me, who wouldn't have been a candidate for the Morgan Lewis types of firms in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
