At the recent “Future of Legal Education” symposium, the issue of law school curriculum reform surfaced once again. As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education, Erwin Chemerinsky, the inaugural dean of the University of California Irvine School of Law, was the keynote speaker, and acknowledged that most law schools are “remarkably resistant to change.”
He pointed out that sticking to the same traditional teaching methods were more cost-effective than running simulations and clinical classes. Plus, faculty members have to approve these changes, “most of whom graduated from the same elite law schools, have comfortable jobs, and have little reason to want change.”
Nevertheless, law schools are not accepting all the blame, arguing that the ABA set accreditation rules that “discourage innovation.” The ABA’s law-school accreditation committee is in the process of reviewing its standards. Yet, legal educators remain conflicted over the need to prepare their students for the professional world while still focusing on fundamentals and broader goals.
The Vault’s Law Blog offers some suggestions to integrate practical learning without raising costs, and encourages balancing “legal theory and interdisciplinary instruction with hands-on work.” Another useful idea is to require career counseling appointments with each student once a year and help create personalized career plans for them.
Meanwhile, some schools are taking the need for practical education seriously, with Washington and Lee University School of Law revamping its entire third year curriculum, Chronicle reports.
Under the new curriculum, “each semester of the third year now starts with a two-week-long court simulation that provides participants with a crash course in the skills they’ll be learning. Students are also required to complete 65 hours of law-related service and a semester-long program on professionalism. The crux of the program, though, is the dozen or so problem-based courses, some taught by high-profile practicing lawyers, that simulate actual legal cases.” Students finish the program so prepared that they remind hiring associates more of second-year associates than new lawyers.
California Western School of Law teaches basic legal skills in the first year alongside the core curriculum. In the second year, students participate in simulated client sessions, in order to prepare them for semester-long internships in the third year. In this way, “the program starts out defining the skills that lawyers need in practice and then working back to insert them in the curriculum.”
The Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center at Touro College takes advantage of its proximity to federal and state courthouses, with first-years visiting the courts to meet with judges and lawyers and watch proceedings. Second-year students spend at least four hours a week in courtrooms, integrating the content in the classroom. And in the third year, students take non-credit internships or externships.
While some top-tier schools are making curriculum changes as well, such as Harvard and Stanford, “many of the most sweeping changes have taken place at lesser-known schools looking for a way to differentiate themselves and give students an edge in a fiercely competitive market.” Whatever their underlying goal is, these schools are on the right track, and hopefully many more will soon follow suit.
Accepted.com ~ Helping You Write Your Best
Read the full article: Law School Curriculum: Resistant to Change?
