Comments on: The crossed purposes of legal education

By: cearta.ie » Updates

cearta.ie » Updates — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:26:23 +0000

[...] The crossed purposes of legal education updates The Goals of a Law School Education [...]

By: » Value of Law School at Halo Secretarial Blog -

» Value of Law School at Halo Secretarial Blog - — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:25:36 +0000

[...] was reading again yesterday a post over at Law21 about law school and the legal system. It was a fascinating read since Jordan touched on whether [...]

By: Ron Fox

Ron Fox — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:13:08 +0000

I forgot to add that, based on my not having heard one member of one faculty in the last twenty-five years being able to give me a reasonable justification of why law students should spend a third year at his or her law school, as part of my Law School Industry Czar campaign, I will soon issue a proposed Ukase (the edict of a Czar) that will eliminate the third year of law school, immediately reducing the cost to attend by one-third.

By: Ron Fox

Ron Fox — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:34:41 +0000

Hi Jordan

As you said, “Law schools are involved in one industry — the granting of legal degrees.”

But here’s what Stanford Law School’s mission is

“Despite these differences, Stanford Law School’s basic mission has not changed since Nathan Abbott’s day: dedication to the highest standards of excellence in legal scholarship and to the training of lawyers equipped diligently, imaginatively, and honorably to serve their clients and the public; to lead our profession; and to help solve the problems of our nation and our world.”

I think that the Law School Industry should prepare students to practice law and to serve the public.

It is for that reason that I have started my campaign to be appointed the Czar of the Law School Industry. For my request and the first proposed Ukases of my Czardom, please start at

http://www.lawyersatisfactionblog.com/2009/01/request-of-ronald-w-fox-to-be.html

and if the link breaks, simply go to
http://www.lawyersatisfactionblog.com and look for the articles.

I do have an opening for campaign manager if anyone is interested.

Ron

PS I agree with Jared and have proposed for years that we work to pass legislation authorizing apprenticeship in all states that don’t allow it at present (I think that seven states do.)

By: idealawg

idealawg — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 21:17:43 +0000

Law prof responds to Jordan Furlong’s post about law school debt and lawyer earnings…

Professor Larry Krieger posted a message on a legal education listserv after I sent the group a link to Furlong’s The crossed purposes of legal education. Krieger wrote (and I quote with his permission):Thanks to Stephanie for posting this. It touches…

By: Joseph Dang

Joseph Dang — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 21:10:13 +0000

Great post. Love your writing. I’ll say this, when I first came out of law school I learned more about practicing law in the few months I did contract work (not document review) for a small firm than anything in school. Law school definitely has its place, but it’s not what some would like you to believe.

By: Jared

Jared — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:20:39 +0000

Which is why I advocate bringing back the apprenticeship model. Law firms already have to pay for such on-the-job training anyway.

By: Susan Cartier Liebel

Susan Cartier Liebel — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:05:08 +0000

Jordan, as always, brilliant. Once you look at all law schools’ agendas it is clear. They are corporations geared towards their bottom line, not the students’. They are also marketing machines doing a double-ended sale – selling the students on great jobs once they’ve passed through the pipeline and selling BigLaw on the great employees they will push through the pipeline. If they fail on either end, their business model collapses. They got fat and happy on the ‘commissions’ they collected for putting the two together. Students call this ‘tuition.’

I could go on….but I won’t.