The Profs protest too much...

Sigh.  'Nuff said, really:

"Looking for a low-stress job? Being a full-time university professor is the least stressful career for 2013, according to jobs site CareerCast.com.

"Professors are kings of their kingdoms," said Tony Lee, publisher of CareerCast.com and JobsRated.com. "They tell students what they must do." '

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/top-10-stressful-stressful-jobs/story?id=18115397


Of course, get ready for the legal-ese reply:  "But, law professors are not the typical university professor, so this does not apply." 

Nope, they certainly aren't.  Considering that they make twice as much as the average professor in the article above, it's no wonder they defend their legal prestidigitations as opposed to say, well, caring about student outcomes.  Meh.  The former is fun navel-gazing, the latter is, well, what can you do?  The market heals all.

With rare exceptions (e.g. Tamanaha, Campos), the law profs are certainly more concerned with declining student enrollments and propping up their failed model, where law graduates are overproduced 2-to-1 to available jobs. 

Don't get embroiled in this quagmire.  Non-trads, cavaet emptor.

EDIT:  Sigh.  'Nuff said, part Deux:

"What Is This Really About?

There is a very important and distinct difference between "knowing that" and "knowing how," with the crux of the distinction being the difference between this initiative and that vast swath of modern academia. "Know that" is a function of rote memorization of static information, passed down from the Prussian method of education implemented over 200 years ago and still common use today and "know how" is basically understanding of how to get things done...

"Know how" is what has separated the labor intensive low margin industries of the far east from the Intellectual Property rich industries found in the US, at least until now. After decades of toiling in an antiquated teaching system producing a legions of leveraged "know that" recipients who then seek "know how" in the work force (basically asking employers to pay to learn on the job what they should have learned from school) to pay off or compensate for hundreds of thousands of dollars of tuition bills and debt, the US is finally paying the piper for its lackadaisical approach to real education. Asian companies such as Samsung are actually outperforming their sterling US counterparts such as Apple in both product capability, product quality and even market share. In order to stem this tide, true "know[ledge] how" must become - once again - the aim, goal and accomplishment of the education system, similar to the apprenticeships of old."

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-01-07/how-profit-impending-bursting-education-bubble-pt-2-knowledge-how-diplomas-fi


Law School is "know that," non-trads, not "know how."  Lol skools are scrambling to demonstrate the link between "valued, versatile JDs" and the marketplace, but they just can't come up with it - maybe because the model is 100+ years old.  "Know that" is not worth the $150k+ price-tag in today's economy.  It just isn't.  Thus, the reliance on graduates with connections who can score their own on-the-job training.  See?  It worked for this handful of students!  The rest of you....well...."network," or something.

Most people assume (understandably) that your legal education is teaching you how to actually practice law, thus the collective head-scratching by the populace-at-large regarding swarms of unemployed or underemployed JDs, who struggle to pay the bills if they even have a job.  The Wizard of LOLZ will bellow otherwise about ungreatful JDs and how Law School is not crass vocational training for obtaining filthy lucre, but by all means do not ignore "The Man" behind the curtain. The price tag is just too high.