The proposal makes sense if you consider that many newly graduated law students will probably seek employment in small to medium-sized established law firms. As a potential law student myself, I have to wonder whether law school graduates would be better served by having mentors during their early years of practice, but avoiding the limitations of traditional articling. I have read articles about the low quality of legal exposure many articling students endure in law firms and upon completion are no better for the experience.

Brilliant post, as usual. I am thrilled that you are using the medium of a blog to share your insight.

My first reaction to your above post is: you are absolutely right. Every law graduate that I know (myself included), knew little to nothing about the actual practice of law prior to stepping into the job. Even students who have excelled in coursework on related topics struggle to put theory into practice.

Take, for example, a simple real estate transaction. I friend who aced “Land Transactions” in law school yet, when faced with an actual transaction, he had no idea where to start. I have had similar experiences in Immigration Law. A strong mentor who can guide us through the nuts and bolts of the practice is truly invaluable.

As you say, law graduates probably could use three years of acting as “interns” until we are sufficiently qualified to really call ourselves “lawyers”. There is a reason that a law firm is called a “practice”. Akin to medical “interns” (who often spend 7 years as “interns”), we could continue to hone our skills under the expertise of mentors.

My wife recently witnessed a neurosurgery with one surgeon and two “interns”. One intern had practiced 7 years while the other had practiced 4. During the surgery, the surgeon would often guide or instruct the interns (out of necessity or pomp, I really can’t say) on proper procedures. My point is simply: we may also use the guidance.

I love your image of articling students as “panicky impostors yoked to the wheel”. I can empathize.

My second reaction is: yes, and we’re moving in the opposite direction. As you are acutely aware, the LSUC has proposed abolishing the articling requirement altogether. So, instead of more guidance and instruction, future “Millenials” may get less. This is a truly a sad state of affairs. If it goes forward, newly-minted law graduates (all 1700 of them in 2012) will be able to put out a shingle right after they pass the Bar. I pity their first clients.

Anyhow, that’s my two cents…