isnt that because there are fewer law departments than there are sociology or history departments? and because law is a professioinal degree where not many people go into academia or complete a doctorate- I dont know what a historian would do without a PhD. Just because something is rarer- I dont think that necessarily means that more meritorious people get it. 372 law jobs v 528 history is not really that far off. Id check some biases you might have going.
Law postdocs are not common because there is no empirical work or peer review. Lawyers dont need two years to publish the papers that get them hired. But if you are getting into statistics, why not compare the applicants to successful candidate ratio of the post docs that each of these people got. That will tell you which was hardest to get. It depends on region and institution.
Now we are holding it against Gauti Pilliai that she got a teaching job early, which is what all post docs want? EUI is literally the post prestigious post doc in Europe! And sure, let's dismiss the Yale PhD woman also out of hand.
They don't count because the commenter clearly has an agenda to make Arul George Scaria out as something special and dismiss the accomplished women on that list. Hard to say whether it is personal or just general misogyny.
Are you related to Arul Scaria? What a strange distinction to draw. European postdocs are very easy to get especially if you have a European PhD. What Atreyee did is much harder. How is Gauri's post doc diminished by the fact that she actually got a teaching job early which is what post docs what unless they are using it to take a break for teaching to write. He is a pleasant guy but not close to the most smart or accomplished on that list.
I will tell you why the non-law and law distinction applies: law postdocs are far rarer than humanities and social sciences postdocs. HigherEdJobs, for example lists 372 law jobs and 8,811 humanities jobs, of which, for example, just history has 528. Law postdocs are not that common for academics whereas history (or anthropology or political science etc.) postdocs are very common for an academic trajectory.
Have you been in academia at all ? This is quite a common thing to do. Post docs are for doing research and producing your first/ second book. It’s not uncommon in this day and age to hold a teaching position and then take a sabbatical and do a post doc.
Why exactly do post docs not count if they’re not in law again? Explain your logic ?
A post doc is by definition done after a phd - Gauri taught for a year or so but that’s not a terribly new trajectory- people want to explore and see how different jobs suit them and application cycles don’t always align- idk why this is being seen as some failure when it’s obviously not.
Would you think someone doing an llm a couple of years after working is inferior to someone who did it right out of undergrad? Thats silly ! Are you still in law school ? Maybe you don’t understand how academia works ? Or adult life ?
Academia isn’t more school - it’s research and writing and teaching and peoples career trajectories don’t follow a linear path. Literally no one I know in academia has followed some linear path.
No, LL.D. is not merely a honorary degree. Check NLSIU's LLD regulations which allow anyone to apply ten years after their PhD with the requisite number of publications. They have to produce an original thesis to get that degree.
Funded by a German Ministry and indeed seems to be a postdoc, but again, not in law like some others mentioned. Social sciences have a different setting than law postdocs - there are more social sciences postdocs than law postdocs.
a) As someone above said, postdocs positions are incredibly difficult to get, so some experience post-PhD makes you stand out from other candidates who may have better credentials.
b) A postdoc is perhaps the only time you get paid handsomely to do only research with minimal to no teaching obligations. So, for example, when an Associate Professor applies for a postdoc, it is one the very few options where they are able to focus purely on research for a certain amount of time.
LL.D is not comparable to postdoc in any sense. Postdocs are faculty members/research fellows in law schools, with a salary. LL.D are research students in India who pay a fees for a useless degree that adds no value whatsoever in academic career.
As someone who is pursuing their PhD, and has an interest in academia but not so much in research, would a post doc or LLD be good for my career in the long run ?
I didn't know that you could go for a post doc after years of teaching. But, like, what's the advantage? Geniunely curious. I can understand going after your PhD, like you're in the flow and continue on your specialised research. But what's the reason after teaching? Like isn't it detrimental to your promotion as you skip those years of teaching? Can anyone explain?
Atreyee Majumdar was not a law postdoc. She had a humanities postdoc (in anthropology). Same with Rinku Lamba. She was not a law postdoc.
Only Gauri Pillai and Arul George Scaria fit what OP was asking for. So even NLS has only 2. Even among those, Gauri Pillai did a PhD, joined teaching and then got a postdoc the subsequent year. Arul George Scaria is the only one who went directly for a postdoc subsequent to his PhD.
An LL.D. is very different. It is mostly granted on the basis of honorary considerations to established people. Moreover, the postdoc is not a degree, it is a paid research position. An LL.D. is not usually a paid position.
NLUs offer a degree called LL.D., which while not exactly post-doc, is comparable. Applicants need to have a PhD and a certain number of publications in the relevant domain to apply.
Lol, no. I personally know at least 10 and 6 belong to different NLUs including but not limited to the places that you mentioned, 2 are from private universities and 2 from TLCs.
Serious answer: IIM Ahmedabad but only in some corporate law and corporate governance fields. That is one of exceptionally few universities in India that at least have a reputation outside of India.
Practice is based on theory. Let's see you cover 5 year+1/2+3/6 years worths theory on your own. No wonder it takes people like you 7 years to establish a practice.
Tell that to all your professors that made you who you are today. This is like a pseudo feminist raised by a single dad saying "all men are evil". If we didn't require LLM and PhD, we'd have graduates teaching law course via chatgpt.
This is true. Postdocs are research positions and hence tougher to get most of the times than even Assistant Professor positions abroad. This is because Assistant Professors are obligated to teach and universities have to fulfil teaching requirements. So, universities are always looking for Assistant Professors. Postdocs, on the other hand, are not obliged to teach and are insanely privileged with research positions.
Think for yourself: how many research professors do you see even in foreign institutions rather than professors? Maybe 1 or 2.
That's true. As a law academic, i can attest that postdocts are extremely difficult positions and very competitive and tough to get. Very very few Indians hold postdoc positions in Law schools abroad.
Bruh, which law university in India gives postdocs? Postdocs are mind-boggingly competitive positions even in foreign institutions where hardly they have 1 or 2 postdocs at any given point of time.
Depends on where. A postdoc from a highly reputed research university will not only help your research profile but will provide greater chances to secure a permanent position abroad if that's what you are keen on. If you plan to work in Indian academia, hardly matters. Experience as Asst. Professor might be much better in terms of UGC checkbox.
A post doc is by definition done after a phd - Gauri taught for a year or so but that’s not a terribly new trajectory- people want to explore and see how different jobs suit them and application cycles don’t always align- idk why this is being seen as some failure when it’s obviously not.
Would you think someone doing an llm a couple of years after working is inferior to someone who did it right out of undergrad? Thats silly ! Are you still in law school ? Maybe you don’t understand how academia works ? Or adult life ?
Academia isn’t more school - it’s research and writing and teaching and peoples career trajectories don’t follow a linear path. Literally no one I know in academia has followed some linear path.
a) As someone above said, postdocs positions are incredibly difficult to get, so some experience post-PhD makes you stand out from other candidates who may have better credentials.
b) A postdoc is perhaps the only time you get paid handsomely to do only research with minimal to no teaching obligations. So, for example, when an Associate Professor applies for a postdoc, it is one the very few options where they are able to focus purely on research for a certain amount of time.
Atreyee Majumdar was not a law postdoc. She had a humanities postdoc (in anthropology). Same with Rinku Lamba. She was not a law postdoc.
Only Gauri Pillai and Arul George Scaria fit what OP was asking for. So even NLS has only 2. Even among those, Gauri Pillai did a PhD, joined teaching and then got a postdoc the subsequent year. Arul George Scaria is the only one who went directly for a postdoc subsequent to his PhD.
2. Arul George Scaria
3. Atreyee Majumdar
4. Kena Wani (sponsored by Max Planck but in India)
5. Rinku Lamba (I think, but I'm not 100 per cent sure if her fellowships were post docs or not)
Gauri Pillai is pursuing Postdoc now.
There are others too whom I'm not sure if their fellowships were postdocs or not.
I think you might mean 5 NLS graduates, no? Is that correct? Where are they doing their postdocs?
Think for yourself: how many research professors do you see even in foreign institutions rather than professors? Maybe 1 or 2.