Technological Integration

There are distinct gains to be made in legal learning through intelligent use of technology. A large part of what we pay can be explained in economic terms as what the market will bear (ie waste). In California, correspondence law schools teach the same subjects as CLS (though quite differently) at a fraction of the cost. To me, this suggests that we could gain a lot from moving some of our rote learning online. The goal is not to abandon all of our classroom interactions, nor to lose our sense of community, but to strengthen both. Just because the internet has made it easier for less prestigious and less wealthy institutions to spread knowledge doesn't mean it can't do the same for schools older than our country. The future of social interaction is bound up in technology, and the better we can adapt our education to that fact, the more equipped our lawyers will be to deal with their clients' problems - both in understanding and in capacity.

Collaboration vs. Competition

The fixation on grades at this school is a nominally pro-student phenomenon. The firms want grades, so our students should have some by the time EIP rolls around. This justification is flimsy, and has been discussed at length in this class over the course of the semester. Why is doesn't it hold in Uris hall, where many students are also being recruited in a similar fashion? How is it that Business School is the most touchy-feely, collaborative, judgment-free place on this campus? It seems that in the raw pursuit of lucre, working together works. Why is this less true for lawyers? What solo practitioner ever achieved anything without the ability to convince other people to work with her? What project ever gets done in a big firm by one single hired brain? Lawyers don't work in organizations any smaller than businesspeople do, in fact, they are businesspeople. Whether they litigate, negotiate, advise, or write, lawyers work for and with people. Strengthening their ability to do that should be a prime goal of law school.

It's arguable that activities such as journals, moot court, and even student organizations foster that kind of collaboration. That admitted, the core courses do not foster any meaningful collaboration. Study groups may be fun, but by introducing diverging goals (grades) to compete with the shared goal of learning, collaboration is not really going to get off the ground. Of course there are always competing goals in life and work, but the blunt pressure not to help each other out makes grades worse than pointless - they're counter-productive.