We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Having said that, do bear in mind (and I'm sorry in advance if I'm disabusing you of notions to the contrary) that your expectations from the colleges themselves (in terms of facilitating your preparedness for a job at firms) should be close to zero. With very few exceptions, most of the courses offered across these universities aren't great - most of your learning will be pursuant to your own initiatives, aided by on-the-job learning that you may (but aren't sure to) receive during the course of internships, and perhaps moots/publications.
What these colleges do offer you are, reputation (yes, brand does matter), possibly a benevolent alumni base to draw upon, peers of above average intelligence (but many of whom may be exceptionally smart and well read for their age), and decent infrastructure in terms of libraries, subscriptions to legal databases, etc. How you leverage all of these will be up to you; but expect very less/no institutional support.
1. Buy a North Smart Glass, which is more realistic looking than Google Glass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eO-Y36_t08
2. Screen share with CLAT coach or family member in next room, who will whisper answers.
3. CLAT coach switches on his mobile, along with his students. Everyone mutes their PC. Coach calls out the answers on his phone (which is out of camera range). He either covers his mouth while giving the answers, or wears a face mask citing Covid.
4. Family member in next room uses Morse code using soft taps on the wall.
5. For GK or vocabulary, have a board behind your laptop with 100 expected questions. Another option is to paste sheets in a pencil box or behind a water bottle.
6. If you have a dog, ask a family member in the next room to insert a small sheet with the answers in the dog's collar. Train your dog to come into the room and land on your lap. Shoo it away, while stealing the cheat sheet from the collar.
7. For girls with long hair, cover your ear and have a wireless earpiece hidden.
8. Girls are advised not to wear make or wear fashionable clothes, else the proctor may ogle at you and you will find it difficult to cheat. Guys are similarly advised to dress shabbily.
Philip G. Altbach, Maria Yudkevich & Laura E. Rumbley
Asia Pacific Education Review volume 16, pages317–330(2015)
"Our perspective is that faculty inbreeding is problematic and, where it exists, is often associated with a whole range of worrisome issues in relation to the academic and administrative functions of higher education institutions and systems. It limits the scope of hiring the best possible candidates for academic appointments—from both within the country and internationally. Inbreeding tends to entrench the academic culture already existing in the institutions where inbreeding occurs (Padilla 2008), and makes change and reform even more difficult than would normally be the case. It solidifies hierarchical relationships within departments and faculties and enhances the power of senior professors (e.g., Rocca 2007; Godechot and Louvet 2008). It may also create particularism—for example, in the form of applying preferential hiring or promotions standards for some (internal) colleagues or candidates—as opposed to universalism, which implies the same treatment for all (Blau 1973; Bridgeland 1982). Inbreeding may perpetuate unfair power dynamics reflected in society more broadly—and may be particularly detrimental to women and others traditionally excluded from academe (Wyer 1980; Pan 1993). New ideas, concerning the academic discipline as well as the organization of studies and the curriculum, may be more difficult to implement. This occurs because both faculty and administrators consider the status quo to be “natural” and beneficial, and their interests are squarely invested in established academic and administrative arrangements. In short, new perspectives and new relationships do not take hold as easily where inbreeding is prevalent, and departments, schools, and the entire university are less innovative and open (for various examples and discussion, see Smythe and Smythe 1944; Pelz and Andrews 1966; Velho and Krige 1984; Horta et al. 2007). In the twenty-first century, where knowledge is rapidly changing and increasingly globalized, inbreeding engenders traditionalism, which limits excellence and innovation."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12564-015-9391-8
Each equity partner gets a specified percentage of the profit pool plus a fixed retainer component.
New entrants to the pool (usually home grown) get a small percentage (1 % or lower).
Laterals (rare, unless you are bringing in a substantial and established practice, which the firm does not have or wants to build on AND are generally a pleasant person, although notable exceptions have slipped in and continue to exist) get a negotiated share of the profits their practice generates until the next profit share re-set.
Every 3 years, the elected Compensation Committee re-evaluates every equity partner’s (yes everyone’s) profit share based on various determined metrics, including revenue generated and contribution to firm building. Your profit percentage could move up or down, based largely on how your practice has performed financially in the past 3 years.
When partners retire (Jyothi, Berjis) or leave (Sumanto, Abeezar), their share of equity returns to the pool.
So, how much you make as an equity partner at JSA really depends primarily on what you are bringing to the table.
On that note, will leave your word where it presently remains.
As someone 8 years into academia I find this comment absurd. Doctoral studies are the most important years in the training of any would-be teacher. Both the institute of study as well as the thesis are serious indicators of qualification. The standards, the quality, the doctoral committee and the peer group at good universities ensure that average / poor candidates wash out very quickly. I did my Ph.D. research from a Sutton 13 university in the U.K. and it was a well known fact that the bottom quarter of doctorates awarded in my cohort would never get approved at Oxbridge. Getting a thesis defended at Yale is so far removed from (for example) NUJS that a comparison is laughable. Doctorates from places like NUJS or NLU-D are worth very little in terms of achievement or quality.
The content of a thesis is obviously important but the rigorous nature of doctoral study programs at top universities is simply not comparable with Indian NLU-model law schools. Close to anyone who clears the Ph.D. admission test is guaranteed to get one in a few years barring personal feuds with supervisors or domestic issues. On average a thesis from a good university is much superior to one from an NLU. I have also found that even the much reviled "Traditional Universities" are more rigorous in their Ph.D. programs than NLUs (specifically barring NLS and NALSAR).
The data published above also indicate a striking divergence between the faculty of NLU-D and NUJS not only in quality but also in diversity. The former has faculty who have as doctoral alma mater, 18 different institutions while the other has 7. A total of 11% of the NLU-D faculty did their doctorates internally. At NUJS this figure is 48% (and 70% from universities in West Bengal). I do not want to speculate too much but such numbers are deeply worrying as an index of faculty quality and display a homogeneity that is usually actively avoided by responsible universities. At least in the U.K. such a proportion would immediately lead to an investigation by Universities UK followed by a visit from a team from the All-Party Parliamentary University Group within the year.
I also take exception to the vapid generalization that "Any academic worth their salt knows that there are numerous reasons why Indian academics choose/are forced to do their PhDs from the places that they work in". As an academic myself I can state that this is simply not true. PhD candidates may occasionally be teaching assistants for a term but no reputable university will recruit in such large numbers from its own outgoing doctoral cohorts. I have firsthand knowledge of this from TISS, Allahabad University and ILI (in total I spent 3 years in research at these places). If NUJS chooses to do so it can only be due to a severe dearth of candidates or some horrendous management.
Again I do not mean to cast aspersion on NUJS as a law school but if the data on the doctoral backgrounds as published above is correct, it does show a very poor mix of faculty as compared to NLU-D.
[I am using my second family name (initial in India) so those active in academia will know me]
The case filed in Dharwad was a frivolous one. There is no obligation to explicitly state the applicable UGC Regulations in the cover page of the advertisement. Being a State University, NLSIU is bound to follow the UGC Regulations for shortlisting candidates and conducting the interviews. The rules have been followed to the letter.
https://www.nls.ac.in/academics/faculty-recruitment-2020-2/
This is the beginning of Sudhir's strategy to recruit A-grade faculty. Many good candidates will surely apply.