Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'legal'.
Found 3 results
I'm a recent JD grad, currently clerking for a judge (two years). Legal academia, particularly clinical legal teaching, would be my dream job. Would getting an L.L.M./Ph.D./S.J.D. in law help towards obtaining such a position?I was an OK but not great student in my JD program, and I know that hiring for academia can be very elitist.
I'm thinking a little ahead of myself, but as I'm transforming my resume into a CV, I'm starting to wonder, for future publication purposes, whether I should use my legal name or my preferred name. As with many 1.5 generation immigrants, I have a foreign legal name and another English name that I go by. My situation is complicated by the fact that I have co-authored publications (not to mention filed my M.S. thesis) under my legal name. Normally, consistency would make the most sense, and there's always a possibility that certain places may not allow you to use a preferred name. At the same time, however, a lot of people I meet do not know me by my legal name, which means that using my legal name may pose problems as I advance further in my field. In addition, my new field is completely unrelated to my previous field. If I can progress further in this direction, I may even consider eliminating previous publications from my CV altogether, which makes consistency a non-issue. These things indicate that using my preferred name would be better in the long run. Thoughts? Opinions?
This came up on another thread and I thought it was a fascinating topic so I decided to start a new thread about it. I would love to hear your opinions. The poster said that federally funded public graduate schools/programs may be violating the free speech/first amendment rights of applicants if they require an interview as part of the admissions process. The argument was that if the school is a federally funded public university then they should not be interviewing applicants to determine whether the applicant is a "good fit" for the program since there is no way to do so without violating the free speech/first amendment rights of applicants. Essentially, the school is monitoring the thoughts, feelings, beliefs, etc of students to determine "good fit" which is unconstitutional. Do you believe that federally funded public universities are violating the first amendment rights of applicants by conducting the interview and/or asking for writing samples? Do you think that there is such a thing as "good fit" when it comes to federally funded public universities? Should the interview be eliminated altogether? Why or why not?