The National Law Journal
April 24, 2013
6. April 25, 2013 01:38 PM
1. What drives many public law schools is the low cost -- essentially, profits. Probably it's necessary to substitute noneconomic barriers to entry to stem oversupply.
2. The first two mandatory courses that should be added to the curriculum:
a. Rainmaking aka business development;
b. Logic (symbolic and mathematical, so lawyers can see through the psuedo-logic that infects numerious legal rulings.
7. April 25, 2013 10:53 AM
I am the Dean of a Law School in Costa Rica in a private University, ULACIT, and I agree with the use of accreditation standars to force chages in Law Schools. Accreditarion is an instrument to give quality to legal education. I have read that Law Schools can reduced the time of preparation and include more practice (Clinics). In my country and in general in Latin America the teaching of Law is very memoristic wthout practices in most of the universities. You have been an example for us in the way to teach in the best way. What is happening?
— Rosa M Abdelnour
8. April 25, 2013 10:37 AM
Law school is a working knowledge profession, and so it should be compared to traditional trade schools. Students should spend a year learning about the basics of the system, the various entities, court structures, key locations, etc. for the state they intend to practice in. Secondly, either focused classes or apprenticeship-like work scenarios should be mandated. Students should be educated as if each one of them were to become a solo practitioner; this way they'll learn the standards of the profession, a variety of topics in various fields and what it really takes to survive the industry. Every student should know how to conduct a real estate closing, file a small claims lawsuit, draft a will, etc.
The amount of students accepted to the "apprenticeship" should vary based on job opportunities each year. Trade schools and related associations do the exact same thing for other industries. Most importantly, the cost of education needs serious evaluation. It's not feasible to charge $100,000 for an education that might not bring occupational benefits or meaningful salaries.
— Jim P.