Law students,
Many of your professors didn't practice law - not long enough to gain perspective and not long enough to become competent practitioners who could handle cases from inception to conclusion. This results in a schooling experience that is overly academic and not grounded in skill based learning (there is a place for academics in the law).
The consequence of how law school has chosen to teach, chosen to use your money, will impact you. And, I would argue that a large percentage of law student and lawyer dissatisfaction is based on how we are first exposed to the law, which is law school.
Why do I think this? Because law school operates in an academic vacuum where the law is approached from a reading, writing, and thinking perspective. Law school is minor league appellate judge training. Appellate judges are readers, thinkers, and writers. They don't do, they write opinions. And this isn't an attack on appellate court judges, the law requires appeals courts who review records and apply the law to case records. But this isn't what the vast majority of lawyers do. And so, we leave law school and start jobs that bear no resemblance to our expensive, time intensive training. No wonder so many feel lost.
After the required courses, law schools should turn to clinical teaching. The 2nd half of law school should have students complete 4 out of the 6 listed clinical rotations.
3 months criminal law
3 months family law
3 months business law
3 months wills, trust, estates, and probate
3 months civil litigation
3 months appellate advocacy with intensive legal writing and trial court motions practice
Why? Because courses like crim law, crim/civ pro, and evidence only make full sense once you start to put them to work in a criminal law/civil litigation clinic. Until then, it's just in your head - and that is insufficient teaching for a profession. And it is insufficient teaching for the cost of tuition.
Teaching this way is possible.
#lawstudents
Many of your professors didn't practice law - not long enough to gain perspective and not long enough to become competent practitioners who could handle cases from inception to conclusion. This results in a schooling experience that is overly academic and not grounded in skill based learning (there is a place for academics in the law).
The consequence of how law school has chosen to teach, chosen to use your money, will impact you. And, I would argue that a large percentage of law student and lawyer dissatisfaction is based on how we are first exposed to the law, which is law school.
Why do I think this? Because law school operates in an academic vacuum where the law is approached from a reading, writing, and thinking perspective. Law school is minor league appellate judge training. Appellate judges are readers, thinkers, and writers. They don't do, they write opinions. And this isn't an attack on appellate court judges, the law requires appeals courts who review records and apply the law to case records. But this isn't what the vast majority of lawyers do. And so, we leave law school and start jobs that bear no resemblance to our expensive, time intensive training. No wonder so many feel lost.
After the required courses, law schools should turn to clinical teaching. The 2nd half of law school should have students complete 4 out of the 6 listed clinical rotations.
3 months criminal law
3 months family law
3 months business law
3 months wills, trust, estates, and probate
3 months civil litigation
3 months appellate advocacy with intensive legal writing and trial court motions practice
Why? Because courses like crim law, crim/civ pro, and evidence only make full sense once you start to put them to work in a criminal law/civil litigation clinic. Until then, it's just in your head - and that is insufficient teaching for a profession. And it is insufficient teaching for the cost of tuition.
Teaching this way is possible.
#lawstudents
