If you thought you’d heard that last about this year’s hem length at law schools, you’re sadly mistaken. Dave Hoffman at Concurring Opinions, the sounding board for novel approaches to legal education, has posed the big question: Why bother at all?
This question follows Rush and Matsuo’s paper, Does Law School Curriculum Affect Bar Examination Passage? An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Which Were Related to Bar Examination Passage between 2001 and 2006 at a Midwestern Law School. With a title like this, who could help but rush to read it? The problem, you see, is that bar exam passage has become a critical sticking point for schools that want to maintain their prominence in the Tier system.
What’s the Tier system? Don’t feel bad. I had no clue what this was about either, until David Lat at Above The Law rubbed my nose in it with his posts explaining that anyone who doesn’t go to a Tier 1 law school is destined to be a janitor somewhere. I am now ashamed of my legal education. Who knew?
But getting back to our point, apparently law schools have learned that their curriculum isn’t doing much to get their graduates through the bar exam, so they have resorted to making “marginal” students take courses directly related to passing the bar. And it’s not helping. The question is thus begged, now what?
While Dave first notes that the study ignores a minor detail, that many law professors aren’t members of the bar in the state where their school is situated, and can teach to a test that they’ve never taken (or haven’t taken in 30 years?), he nonetheless asks what courses, if not bar courses, should students take?
The first response comes from his fellow faculty members, all warm and fuzzy: “select courses that are challenging and intrinsically interesting.” But even Dave knows what a load of crap that is, and questions its usefulness. And ultimately, it leads to the big question, “is there a point to law school beyond sorting students?”
In the spirit of trying to be helpful wherever possible, I feel compelled to jump in here. Yes, there is a point. Here are my top 10 reasons for keeping law schools:
10. I suffered through it, so all new lawyers should have to suffer too.
9. Without law schools, all those law professors would be out of work, and they have families to feed, you know.
8. Law firms wouldn’t have a clue who to hire at $190,000 per year if there were no Tier rankings.
7. Men and woman have become famous by “authoring” books that do nothing but reprint decisions written by other people, and no one would know them without law schools forcing kids to buy their books.
6. Courts would be left to their own devices without the insight provided by law review articles explaining how the law applies to real people.
5. Generations of law school alumni have given their hard earned dollars to get their names inscribed on various items of furniture, which will be wasted without law schools.
4. Where else would you get to see future judges vomiting their brains out during a party?
3. Former Assistant United States Attorneys need a place to call home when they can’t get a job at Biglaw.
2. Where else could David Boise get an honorary doctorate?
And the number 1 reason to keep law schools:
To teach men and women how to be lawyers.
No need to thank me for the answer, Dave. I consider it a duty.
This question follows Rush and Matsuo’s paper, Does Law School Curriculum Affect Bar Examination Passage? An Empirical Analysis of the Factors Which Were Related to Bar Examination Passage between 2001 and 2006 at a Midwestern Law School. With a title like this, who could help but rush to read it? The problem, you see, is that bar exam passage has become a critical sticking point for schools that want to maintain their prominence in the Tier system.
What’s the Tier system? Don’t feel bad. I had no clue what this was about either, until David Lat at Above The Law rubbed my nose in it with his posts explaining that anyone who doesn’t go to a Tier 1 law school is destined to be a janitor somewhere. I am now ashamed of my legal education. Who knew?
But getting back to our point, apparently law schools have learned that their curriculum isn’t doing much to get their graduates through the bar exam, so they have resorted to making “marginal” students take courses directly related to passing the bar. And it’s not helping. The question is thus begged, now what?
While Dave first notes that the study ignores a minor detail, that many law professors aren’t members of the bar in the state where their school is situated, and can teach to a test that they’ve never taken (or haven’t taken in 30 years?), he nonetheless asks what courses, if not bar courses, should students take?
The first response comes from his fellow faculty members, all warm and fuzzy: “select courses that are challenging and intrinsically interesting.” But even Dave knows what a load of crap that is, and questions its usefulness. And ultimately, it leads to the big question, “is there a point to law school beyond sorting students?”
In the spirit of trying to be helpful wherever possible, I feel compelled to jump in here. Yes, there is a point. Here are my top 10 reasons for keeping law schools:
10. I suffered through it, so all new lawyers should have to suffer too.
9. Without law schools, all those law professors would be out of work, and they have families to feed, you know.
8. Law firms wouldn’t have a clue who to hire at $190,000 per year if there were no Tier rankings.
7. Men and woman have become famous by “authoring” books that do nothing but reprint decisions written by other people, and no one would know them without law schools forcing kids to buy their books.
6. Courts would be left to their own devices without the insight provided by law review articles explaining how the law applies to real people.
5. Generations of law school alumni have given their hard earned dollars to get their names inscribed on various items of furniture, which will be wasted without law schools.
4. Where else would you get to see future judges vomiting their brains out during a party?
3. Former Assistant United States Attorneys need a place to call home when they can’t get a job at Biglaw.
2. Where else could David Boise get an honorary doctorate?
And the number 1 reason to keep law schools:
To teach men and women how to be lawyers.
No need to thank me for the answer, Dave. I consider it a duty.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Is Law School Really That Bad These Days?
some of their sillier ideas as well as helping the future of the legal profession to understand what they are getting into.
Law School Problem Solving 101: The Professors
Law School Problem Solving 101: The Professors