If you believe like me that law students need real legal experience, then maybe you should agree that law schools probably need to jettison their legal clinics and farm their law students out to non-profit and for-profit legal organizations that look to make a difference in this world.
As reported by California State University Northridge, law schools and clinic directors place pressures to avoid cases and issues that might not be popular with donors, lawmakers and others.
Law, lawsuits, arbitration, collections, legislation and criminal prosecutions are made up of hard decisions when you think about it. What good does a law school do if its ability to analyze issues, cases, and decisions end at the classroom door? What good is it if the law students cannot participate in making these decisions and participating in these arguments outside of the sterile environment of the lecture hall? It is akin to researches working on cures for serious diseases only to told told they can never subject their cures to human trials. What good is that?
The bottom like is whether law schools are dedicated to developing gifted and talented law graduates that understand the real complexities of law and the practice of law.
Too many of these law schools legal clinics are too banal and too insignificant in any event. Many are around to pacify the critics that law schools do not offer a practical education.
But, do not get me wrong. I understand the political pressures (for lack of a better word) represent a real concern for law schools and clinics. They just cannot ignore the wishes of their donors and legislators. Therefore, one solution might very well be to associate with free standing not-for-profit legal clinics, with their own separate boards and names and objectives. In places, like Houston, Texas, where there are multiple law schools within miles of each other, why not assist in building and establishing a true non-profit law firm that serves all three law schools, that is more broad-based, relevant and has greater combined resources to help train practice ready lawyers?
After all, is that not what most medical schools do? Many associate with other private medical institutions for the training of their students outside of the clinical environment.
Chuck,
At Southern IL U., a large university in a rural environment, their clinics ARE the non-profit legal providers...few other legal service corp. providers around. Clinical experience was the best and most useful aspect of my legal education.
PO
Posted by: Peter Olson | June 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
I hear from many students, and some lawyers, that the clinical experience was good and useful, but I can only wonder if the money isn't better spent on learning doctrine. What am I missing if I forego taking clinic and take Trusts & Estates and UCC III, or Real Estate instead? In practice we will be required to both learn practice procedures and become familiar with specific bodies of law. Which will be a bigger hassle to learn on the fly? Assuming we actually learn something from the classes we attend, and that good legal analysis is at least part of being a good lawyer, what is the cost of learning to function in practice while practicing vs. having the experience in law school at the expense of substantive courses?
Posted by: PerGynt | June 18, 2009 at 11:03 AM