Global Law in American Law Schools: Prospects and Difficulties of Incorporating a Transnational Element in Legal Education

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry Catá Backer
Keyword(s):  
Legal Education ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Law ◽  
Global Law

The Proliferation of Case Method Teaching in American Law Schools: Mr. Langdell's Emblematic “Abomination,” 1890-1915

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Case Method ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Higher Education ◽  
American Law ◽  
Law Professors

Case method teaching was first introduced into American higher education in 1870 by Christopher C. Langdell (1826-1906) of Harvard Law School (HLS), where it became closely associated with—and emblematic of—a set of academic meritocratic reforms. Though regnant today, “the ultimate triumph of [Langdell's] system was not apparent” for many years. The vast majority of students, alumni, and law professors initially derided it as an “abomination,” and for two decades case method and the associated reforms were largely confined to Harvard. During the subsequent twenty-five years between 1890 and 1915, a national controversy ensued as to whether case method teaching—and the concomitant meritocratic reforms—would predominate in legal education and, ultimately, professional education in the United States.

scholarly journals Law School Learning Outcomes: Legal English Course Contribution

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-146
Author(s):  
Elena Vyushkina
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Oral Communication ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Legal Writing ◽  
American Law ◽  
Russian Law

Abstract Standards of professional legal education are developed by different organizations: in some countries these are governmental bodies, in others these are professional associations. Apart from a country these standards include Learning Outcomes which shape law schools’ curricula. Both American and European standards mention, to different extent, written and oral communication in the legal context, but a number and contents of subjects directed at developing and mastering professional communicative competency differ a lot. There are disciplines totally devoted to the competency named (e.g. legal writing) as well as courses in which communicative skills are an integral constituent for their successful completion (e.g. basis of negotiations/mediation/client consultation). The article goal is to find a place and role of a Legal English (LE) course in achieving learning outcomes connected with professional communicative competence. The methodology incorporated desk and field studies. The literature review is aimed at identifying current state of affairs in American law schools, as they provide first-class legal education recognized all over the world, and in Russian law schools, as the author works in this system and is interested in its development. A questionnaire was designed to explore Russian law school graduates’ assessment of practicality of subjects they had studied for their professional activities. The analysis of literature and Internet sources allowed to specify the ways of teaching written and oral communication in American law schools and to highlight the situation in Russian legal education. It shows that the Russian system is characterized by predominance of teaching theory of substantive and procedural rules of law and lack of curriculum disciplines aimed at cultivating skills and competencies. A survey of Russian law schools’ recent graduates indicates that most of communicative, in a broad sense, skills, which they use in their everyday work, were obtained within their LE classes. So, complementing a LE course with modules devoted to different aspects of legal writing and specific patterns of lawyer-client, lawyer-lawyer, lawyer-judge communication will definitely contribute to achieving learning outcomes which are put forward by legal education standards.

scholarly journals WIĘCEJ TEORII I WIĘCEJ PRAKTYKI? KSZTAŁCENIE INTERDYSCYPLINARNE I NIEDOGMATYCZNE W PROGRAMACH STUDIÓW PRAWNICZYCH AMERYKAŃSKICH UCZELNI

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Tymoteusz Zych
Keyword(s):  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Law ◽  
Bar Association ◽  
Polish Law ◽  
Interdisciplinary Courses ◽  
School Curricula

More Theory, more Practice? Interdisciplinary and NonDogmatic Education in American Law School CurriculaSummaryWhile American legal education is very often invoked as a modelfor Polish law faculties, the actual role of interdisciplinary and non--dogmatic courses in the curricula of American law schools has not beencoherently analysed yet. The American example shows that the conceptof legal education has a significant impact on the development of thelegal system. Interdisciplinary courses have been present in the curricula of university law schools since the beginning of American history.Currently the American Bar Association requires law schools to includenon-dogmatic contents in their curricula to obtain accreditation. Thewidest range of non-dogmatic courses is offered by the most prestigiouslaw schools. Leading American legal thinkers of all currents emphasisethe importance of interdisciplinary and non-dogmatic subjects in theeducational process. The paper concludes with a comparative analysisof the role of interdisciplinary subjects in law school curricula in Polandand in the United States.

scholarly journals Bringing Purposefulness to the American Law School’s Support of Professional Identity Formation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis D. Bilionis
Keyword(s):  
Professional Identity ◽  
Identity Formation ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Educational Process ◽  
Law School ◽  
Professional Identity Formation ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Law ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Staff Experiences

Ten years after the publication of Educating Lawyers, a growing number of American law schools are taking initiative to better support their students in the formation of professional identity. There is widespread recognition that success in these efforts requires an element of “purposefulness” on the part of law faculty and staff. Experiences, environments, and pedagogies that actually work for professional identity formation must be crafted and promoted with intentionality. Bringing the requisite purposefulness to the effort, however, will take a mindset about the education of a lawyer that will be new to many in legal education. This article explores that mindset and the habits of the mind that will best serve law schools as they move forward in this area. Schools need not abandon prevailing approaches to the cognitive and skills dimensions of a law student’s education that Educating Lawyers called the first and second apprenticeships, respectively. But when it comes to the third apprenticeship of professional identity and sense of purpose, a reorientation in thinking about law students, their law school, and the educational process is necessary. That change in the way of thinking can be invigorating and empowering, revealing opportunities with time, talent, space, and experiences that have been underexplored by American legal education.

Self-test: what do the following symbols in Figure 7.25, below, tell us? How many symbols are there? Figure 7.25: self-test re: symbols The analysis of the chart The last stage is analysis, as the chart is only the means to the ends! As the full chart is considered links between propositions and evidence can be more clearly seen. The point of the chart is the juxtapositioning of the evidence, facts, assertions, etc in a way allowing simultaneous viewing so that they ultimately lead to a single finally believed outcome. The process of reaching the outcome is the argument. The outcome is the conclusion of the argument. Wigmore had many symbols denoting explanation, weak and strong inferences, the movement from doubt to belief, unsupported and supported inferences. He had symbols denoting object as opposed to person testimony, symbols for denials, rival assertions, and for generalisations, etc. His charts were extremely complicated matters taking many hours to construct, which is probably why his methods were not widely taken on board in American law schools, although he himself used the method in his teaching for 40 years. In addition whilst the complex symbolic networks that he set up appeal to some students, many are perhaps fearful or completely alienated by what appear to be complex mathematical structures. When Wigmore first set out his chart method in 1913 he said that it was not the symbols themselves that were important but the simultaneous juxtaposition of facts. Therefore the person constructing a chart could use their own symbols. Anderson and Twining did just that and made some changes to the charting method (that is, they modified it) for teaching. It is a good modification and is discussed below. 7.10.2 Anderson and Twining’s modification of the Wigmore Chart Method In an excellent book, Analysis of Evidence (1991), Anderson and Twining take the time to discuss the uses and limits of a Wigmore chart as a tool of legal education. They also note its use in other areas that require investigative tools. They recount an interesting story that demonstrates the far reaching applications of the method that Wigmore devised. They record David Schum presenting Wigmore’s Chart method without revealing its source to a group of computer analysts in the 1980s. When he asked them to predict when the system was invented the earliest date given was 1970! The analysts said the sophisticated inference networks had not been developed prior to the 1970s. In the 1990s David Schum and others have

2012 ◽  
pp. 245-245
Keyword(s):  
Legal Education ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Mathematical Structures ◽  
American Law ◽  
Last Stage ◽  
Interesting Story ◽  
Self Test ◽  
Set Up

AALS Panel – Global Legal Education – Can American Law Schools Respond to the Opportunities?

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry Bakken
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
American Law ◽  
Foreign Governments ◽  
Simultaneous Movement

During the past decade many American law schools have identified and responded to the opportunity and necessity of training law students and lawyers for the challenges created by globalization. Opportunities are certainly available to schools with strong business, international trade and human rights programs. Opportunities are, however, also available to schools with interests and strengths in the newer disciplines such as conflict resolution, intellectual property and environment protection. Law schools which have ventured into global oriented training have recognized that the market is not simply a one-way-street for domestic students but also includes training of foreign law students and lawyers. Private foundations in the United States and abroad, foreign governments and our national government have helped finance foreign lawyer visits and training events throughout America. When international lawyers visit the United States, domestic law schools are involved as hosts, training sites, and sources of professional expertise. There has also been a simultaneous movement of domestic lawyers and law students through foreign law school programs and other study abroad opportunities. When all these international experiences are taken together one realizes the need for law schools to become more involved in the development and implementation of training and development of globally oriented legal education.

scholarly journals To work or not to work... Before law school: apprehension, confidence, and cynicism among law students

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yung-Yi Diana Pan
Keyword(s):  
Work Experience ◽  
Immigrant Students ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Economic Recession ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Work Experiences ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Law

<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; text-align: justify; line-height: 200%; -ms-text-justify: inter-ideograph;"> </p><p>Most socio-legal scholarship does not examine pre-law school preparation, more specifically, work experience. The recent American economic recession brought many working adults back into the fold of school. With regard to legal education in particular, how might work experience before law school affect students’ perceptions of the profession, themselves, and their career trajectories? And, how do these experiences vary between law schools, and among law students? Drawing on an ethnographic study at two divergently-ranked American law schools between 2009-2011 (the beginnings of the economic crisis), I argue that student work experiences (or lack thereof) before law school matter for their own perceptions of their school and overall career outlook. I typologize those students who transitioned immediately from undergraduate to law school as "conventionals," and those with work experience prior to commencing legal education as "returnees." I find that overall, returnees are more confident about completing law school, yet cynical about legal education, while their conventional counterparts respect the pedagogy but remain apprehensive regarding their career outlook. In this respect, work experience provides a form of "capital." Notably, most immigrant students in this study are conventionals, and I provide some suggestions to better incorporate these students who already feel as if they are posturing in an unfamiliar cultural and professional environment.</p><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; text-align: justify; line-height: 200%; -ms-text-justify: inter-ideograph;"> </p>

Clinical Legal Education and Democracy in India

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sital Kalantry
Keyword(s):  
Personal Experience ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Legal Services ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Teaching Clinics ◽  
Global Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Voluntary Basis

Formal clinical legal education programs with instructors teaching clinics in a classroom and practice setting are not common in Indian universities. Few programs in which law students provide legal services on a volunteer/voluntary basis to poor communities. This chapter argues that there are many reasons law schools and universities in India should institute clinical legal education programmes—through these classes, students learn practical lawyering skills and at the same time, students provide assistance to people who could not otherwise afford legal services. One less explored rationale for clinical legal education is the relationship between clinical legal education and the promotion of democracy. Through his personal experience in co-teaching a clinic at the Jindal Global Law School, the author develops the connection between democracy in India and clinical legal education.

scholarly journals #ForTheCulture: Generation Z and the Future of Legal Education

2020 ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Tiffany Atkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
Law School ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Accountability Measures ◽  
Generation Z ◽  
American Law

Generation Z, with a birth year between 1995 and 2010, is the most diverse generational cohort in U.S. history and is the largest segment of our population. Gen Zers hold progressive views on social issues and expect diversity and minority representation where they live, work, and learn. American law schools, however, are not known for their diversity, or for being inclusive environments representative of the world around us. This culture of exclusion has led to an unequal legal profession and academy, where less than 10 percent of the population is non-white. As Gen Zers bring their demands for inclusion, and for a legal education that will prepare them to tackle social justice issues head on, they will encounter an entirely different culture—one that is completely at odds with their expectations. This paper adds depth and perspective to the existing literature on Generation Z in legal education by focusing on their social needs and expectations, recognizing them as critical drivers of legal education and reform. To provide Gen Z students with a legal education that will enable them to make a difference for others—a need deeply connected to their motivators and beliefs—law school culture must shift. Reimagining, reconstituting, and reconfiguring legal education to create a culture of inclusion and activism will be essential and necessary. Engaging in this work “for the culture” means getting serious about diversifying our profession by abandoning exclusionary hiring metrics, embedding social justice throughout the law school curriculum, and adopting institutional accountability measures to ensure that these goals are met. Gen Zers are accustomed to opposing institutions that are rooted in inequality; law schools can neither afford, nor ignore the opposition any longer. We must begin reimagining legal education now—and do it, for the culture.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document