Metadata record for After the JD -- Wave 1: A Longitudinal Study of Legal Careers in Transition Data Collection: May 2002-May 2003, United States Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research ICPSR metadata records are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License . 2013-05-25 After the JD -- Wave 1: A Longitudinal Study of Legal Careers in Transition Data Collection: May 2002-May 2003, United States 26302 10.3886/ICPSR26302.v1 Garth, Bryant G. Sterling, Joyce Sander, Richard American Bar Foundation Access Group, Inc. Law School Admission Council National Association for Law Placement, Open Society Institute of the Soros Foundation National Science Foundation NSF Grant No. SES 0115521 Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research 2010-07-15 Garth, Bryant G., Joyce Sterling, and Richard Sander. After the JD -- Wave 1: A Longitudinal Study of Legal Careers in Transition Data Collection: May 2002-May 2003, United States. ICPSR26302-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2010-07-15. doi:10.3886/ICPSR26302.v1 activism attorneys careers economic indicators educational background employment discrimination family background harassment income job history job opportunities job satisfaction job security job skills law school students mentoring occupational mobility participation student financial aid time utilization training work environment workplaces ICPSR.XII The After the JD project is designed to be a longitudinal study, seeking to follow a sample of approximately 10 percent of all the individuals who became lawyers in the year of 2000. It is the largest and most ambitious study ever undertaken by researchers of legal careers aiming to track the professional lives of more than 5,000 lawyers during their first 10 years after law school. Wave 1 of the After the JD study was launched in May 2002. The sample includes new lawyers from 18 legal markets ? ranging from the 4 largest markets (New York City, District of Columbia, Chicago, and Los Angeles) to 14 other areas consisting of small metropolitan areas to entire states. More detailed results can be found under: American Bar Foundation Web site. Lawyers? career trajectories provide a window through which we can analytically examine mobility and movement within the profession, exits from the profession, the effects of educational debt, and job satisfaction within the legal profession. This information is valuable in advising and attracting potential applicants to law school, counseling students while in law school, and working with alumni and practitioners when they join the profession. Some of the topics the study on new lawyers seeks to examine are: (1) Demographic characteristics; (2) financing of legal education; (3) law school and the transition to practice; (4) practice settings within which lawyers work; (5) distribution of income across the profession; (6) dimensions of satisfaction; (7) mobility and turnover. For the most part, the first wave reveals an expected pattern of stratification related to law school attended and grades achieved. The majority of respondents are still working in their first jobs and they are located predominantly in private firms. Many have not yet married and most do not have children yet. In short, the After the JD study aims to create a definitive picture of how the careers of lawyers develop in the early twenty-first century. Building on this first wave, the future work of AJD will employ follow-up questionnaires six and ten years into the respondents? careers. Respondents were asked to give information concerning their employment status, when they started working for their current employer, organizational type, their position within the organization, and how many hours they were expected to bill during a typical week. Furthermore, they were asked to report the division of time allocated for different types of legal matters as well as the percentages involving specific types of clients. They were queried on the different tasks they completed during the past three months and which of those happened on a recurring basis. Their views were sought on changes they would most like to see in their job. They were queried on the proportion of men and minorities in their workplace. Views were sought on how satisfied they were with a range of facets of their job including level of responsibility, recognition, opportunities for advancement, compensation, relationships with colleagues, intellectual challenge, amount of travel, and job security. They were also asked if they had experienced different forms discrimination in the workplace based on their race, religion, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation. Respondents were asked what factors were most important in obtaining their first job after law school, what factors influenced their decision to work in their chosen law setting, and what factors they thought were most important from the organization's view point of making a job offer to them. Information was gathered on respondents participation in a variety of organizations and settings including political parties, PTA and other school organizations, College alumni associations, charitable organizations, gender-based organizations, religious organizations, the American Bar Association, community associations, private clubs, and organized sports leagues. A number of questions were asked about the respondent's educational background including the year they received their undergraduate degree, where they earned their undergraduate degree, their cumulative undergraduate grade point average, undergraduate class rank, undergraduate major, whether they went directly to law school, if not, what they did during the interim, where and when they received their law degree, their cumulative law school grade point average, class rank, and other graduate level degrees they held. Respondents were queried on the importance of various factors in their decision to attend law school and what elements of their law school education and preparation helped most in making the transition to their early work assignments as a lawyer and in their professional career. Demographic variables include employment status, personal income, household income, job history, sex, race, age, political party affiliation, parent's nationality, parent's education, parent's occupation the while respondent was in high school, whether anyone in the respondent's family was a lawyer, marital status, spouses occupation, and number of children that live with the respondent for a significant portion of the year. 2002-05 2003-05 2002-05-20 2003-05-30 Atlanta Boston California Chicago Connecticut District of Columbia Florida Georgia Houston Illinois Indiana Los Angeles Massachusetts Minneapolis Minnesota Missouri New Jersey New York (state) New York City Oklahoma Oregon San Francisco St. Louis Tennessee Texas United States Utah individual Persons who first became members of a state bar in the year 2000, and who graduated from law school in the period July 1, 1998, through June 30, 2000, in the United States. aggregate data survey data The JD study utilizes a two-stage scientific sampling approach, first selecting among metropolitan areas (or non-metropolitan portions of states) to obtain a wide geographic and population size distribution of geographic areas, and second, selecting individuals who meet individual eligibility criteria. In the first stage, the nation was divided into 18 strata by region and size of the new lawyer population. Within each stratum one primary sampling unit (PSU) was selected -- metropolitan area, portion of a state outside large metropolitan areas, or entire state -- was chosen. The PSU's included all four major markets, those with more than 2000 new lawyers (Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and Washington, DC); 5 of the 9 large markets, those with between 750 and 2,000 lawyers; and 9 of the remaining smaller markets. In the second stage, individuals were sampled from each of the PSU's at rates that would, combined, generalize to the national population. Additionally, an oversample of 1,465 new lawyers from minority groups (Blacks, Hispanic, and Asian American) was added. The final sample included just over 9,192 lawyers in the eighteen PSU's. More information about sampling is available in "After the JD: First Results of a National Study of Legal Careers" A joint publication of the NALP Foundation for Law Career Research and Education and the American Bar Foundation (2004). mail questionnaire , telephone interview , web-based survey

Wave 1 awt_nat_nr (N = 32,895) National Sample Selection Probability Weight was adjusted for nonresponse. The weight should be used with the National Sample Cases when making estimates of the characteristics.

Wave 1 awt_min_nr (N = 3,530) Minority Sample Selection Probability Weight was adjusted for nonresponse. The weight should be used when making estimates of the characteristics of minority persons.

Wave 1 awt_comb_nr (N = 32,436) Joint National/Minority Sample Selection Probability Weight was adjusted for nonresponse. The weight takes into account the possibility that an individual could be selected into both the National and Minority Samples, thus it adjusts for the probability of dual selection.

ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

Created variable labels and/or value labels.Created online analysis version with question text.Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes. Variable labels for values AQ57 through AQ61 were corrected. Variables AQ33l1RE, ASAMPLE_, APOS1EYR, and APOS1F contain unknown codes. The number of eligible individuals for AJD Wave 1 is 4,538 which equals a response rate of 71 percent. Ann Arbor, Mi.: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research Additional special permissions, where applicable, are described in the restrictions field.

Please read the terms of use below. If you agree to them, click on the "I Agree" button to proceed. If you do not agree, you can click on the "I Do Not Agree" button to return to the home page.

ICPSR adheres to the principles of the Data Seal of Approval , which, in part, require the data consumer to comply with access regulations imposed both by law and by the data repository, and to conform to codes of conduct that are generally accepted in higher education and scientific research for the exchange of knowledge and information.

These data are distributed under the following terms of use, which are governed by ICPSR. By continuing past this point to the data retrieval process, you signify your agreement to comply with the requirements stated below:

Privacy of RESEARCH SUBJECTS

Any intentional identification of a RESEARCH SUBJECT (whether an individual or an organization) or unauthorized disclosure of his or her confidential information violates the PROMISE OF CONFIDENTIALITY given to the providers of the information. Therefore, users of data agree:

To use these datasets solely for research or statistical purposes and not for investigation of specific RESEARCH SUBJECTS, except when identification is authorized in writing by ICPSR (netmail@icpsr.umich.edu )

To make no use of the identity of any RESEARCH SUBJECT discovered inadvertently, and to advise ICPSR of any such discovery (netmail@icpsr.umich.edu )

 Redistribution of Data

You agree not to redistribute data or other materials without the written agreement of ICPSR, unless:

You serve as the OFFICIAL or DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE at an ICPSR MEMBER INSTITUTION and are assisting AUTHORIZED USERS with obtaining data, or

You are collaborating with other AUTHORIZED USERS to analyze the data for research or instructional purposes.

When sharing data or other materials in these approved ways, you must include all accompanying files with the data, including terms of use. More information on permission to redistribute data can be found on the ICPSR Web site.

Citing Data

You agree to reference the recommended bibliographic citation in any publication that employs resources provided by ICPSR. Authors of publications based on ICPSR data are required to send citations of their published works to ICPSR for inclusion in a database of related publications (bibliography@icpsr.umich.edu ) .

Disclaimer

You acknowledge that the original collector of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.

Violations

If ICPSR determines that the terms of this agreement have been violated, ICPSR will act according to our policy on terms of use violations . Sanctions can include:

ICPSR may revoke the existing agreement, demand the return of the data in question, and deny all future access to ICPSR data.

The violation may be reported to the Research Integrity Officer, Institutional Review Board, or Human Subjects Review Committee of the user's institution. A range of sanctions are available to institutions including revocation of tenure and termination.

If the confidentiality of human subjects has been violated, the case may be reported to the Federal Office for Human Research Protections. This may result in an investigation of the user's institution, which can result in institution-wide sanctions including the suspension of all research grants.

A court may award the payment of damages to any individual(s)/organization(s) harmed by the breach of the agreement.

 Definitions authorized user - A faculty member, staff member, or student at a member institutionICPSR - Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Researchmember institution - An institutional member of ICPSROfficial/Designated Representative - An individual appointed to represent a university's interests in ICPSR. This individual is also charged with providing user support to campus users. promise of confidentiality - A promise to a respondent or research participant that the information the respondent provides will not be disseminated without the permission of the respondent; that the fact that the respondent participated in the study will not be disclosed; and that disseminated information will include no linkages to the identity of the respondent. Such a promise encompasses traditional notions of both confidentiality and anonymity. Names and other identifying information regarding respondents, proxies, or other persons on whom the respondent or proxy provides information, are presumed to be confidential.research subject - A person or organization observed for purposes of research. Also called a respondent. A respondent is generally a survey respondent or informant, experimental or observational subject, focus group participant, or any other person providing information to a study or on whose behalf a proxy provides information.

AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.

 The original collector of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.