31 August 2013

Chasing a Pipe Dream. Or, Effectively Making Students Pay More

It's nice to read support for what I posted here: law schools cannot make graduates "practice-ready" (in three much less two years). Read the supportive Wall Street Journal piece here.

I can only repeat what I wrote before: Current senior big-law whiners became practice ready by, well, practicing. They cut their teeth under the supervision of more senior practitioners who were willing to subsidize the experience. The current push for practical training (rather than legal education) comes from those unwilling to take a cut in their precious seven-figure salaries because big-firm clients are no longer willing to pay for junior associate training. And when big-law speaks, the American Bar Association and smaller firms jump on the bandwagon. Cry me a bucket. (Go here, here, and here.)

Let me repeat that I fully support what goes by the moniker "experiential education."  Regent Law School offers many courses that permit student to apply what they've learned. In fact, we will be starting a Bankruptcy Practicum in the spring. (More about that at another time.) My only beef is with those who think that law school can go so far as to make a student "practice-ready." That's the pipe dream.

1 comment:

  1. My first year as an associate, my receipts were triple my salary. So I have a hard time buying that firms lose money on young associates.

    But I do think the pie has shrunk considerably for lawyers everywhere, including corporate firms.