LawSchoolasTrainingforHierarchy 23 - 09 Jun 2012 - Main.JaredMiller
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="Main.RohanGrey" |
I found this account of the law school experience by Professor Duncan Kennedy of Harvard Law to be relevant to our discussions in class, thought I’d share. | | -- AlexKonik - 19 Apr 2012
This idea of a a teaching law firm greatly interests me. Teachers College recently went the same route with establishing its own elementary school (notably, a regular old, non-charter public school), which I am watching with great excitement. What are people's thoughts this idea as applied to somewhere like Columbia?
\ No newline at end of file | |
> > |
I think a teaching law firm is a wonderful idea but sadly something that an institution like Columbia is not going to entertain. The complaints about law school (failure to teach real skills, incredibly high cost of tuition with the hollow promise of a job) are complaints that don't apply to Columbia in the eyes of the administrators here (though they really should). As much as people stress out about getting jobs at EIP and elsewhere, 99% of us will be employed at graduation. The vast majority of us will also be working in jobs where our employers have the resources to make up from the lack of training we may get from the three years spent here. In a similar vein to teaching law firms, I went to the RebLaw? conference at Yale in February and heard about the great work Fred Rooney is doing at CUNY with what he calls "Social Justice Incubators." The idea is that CUNY will give recent grads office space and mentorship over a two-year period to help them start their own practices while simultaneously providing more low-cost legal services to low-income people. I mentioned this program to Dean Chapnick and asked if Columbia ever considered trying to start something like this, and she said there's just no demand for it - in here view, the difference between Columbia and CUNY is that Columbia grads have very little problem in the job market, while CUNY grads can't get jobs and need programs like these as a result. Necessity is the mother of invention, and unfortunately you're not going to get innovation from a school like Columbia that doesn't feel like the status quo is really so bad.
The shame of this is that the status quo is far worse than it appears. Yes, we will all be employed after graduation, but because Columbia doesn't care about leaving after three years with real legal skills, it is very difficult to find employment in jobs in which the employer doesn't have the resources to train you (i.e. non-big firm jobs). Eben constantly tells us to start our own practice after we graduate, and people think it's a ridiculous suggestion, in part because it is. At the moment, Columbia isn't training us to be lawyers but instead merely kicking us down the line to employers who have accepted the responsibility of training us instead. But we're the ones who suffer under that status quo - yes, we get jobs, but we often have to sell our license in those jobs in order to get the training that we should be receiving in exchange for the $150K that we've already paid.
-- JaredMiller - 09 Jun 2012 | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
LawSchoolasTrainingforHierarchy 22 - 06 Jun 2012 - Main.RohanGrey
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="Main.RohanGrey" |
I found this account of the law school experience by Professor Duncan Kennedy of Harvard Law to be relevant to our discussions in class, thought I’d share. | | On a related aside, I submit that, knowing nothing about law school or the legal profession before coming here, I am happy that there is virtually no course choice in the first year. If there was, advantage would be given to sons of lawyers and daughters of professors. You may not know the good "legal methods" classes to take.
-- AlexKonik - 19 Apr 2012
\ No newline at end of file | |
> > | This idea of a a teaching law firm greatly interests me. Teachers College recently went the same route with establishing its own elementary school (notably, a regular old, non-charter public school), which I am watching with great excitement. What are people's thoughts this idea as applied to somewhere like Columbia? | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
LawSchoolasTrainingforHierarchy 21 - 19 Apr 2012 - Main.AlexKonik
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="Main.RohanGrey" |
I found this account of the law school experience by Professor Duncan Kennedy of Harvard Law to be relevant to our discussions in class, thought I’d share. | | Professors should teach all of this at once and later have a series of courses about more specific doctrinal areas - commercial transactions, mass torts, etc. The central spine of the thing could be articulated best by separating it from the other parts.
-- SkylarPolansky - 18 Apr 2012
\ No newline at end of file | |
> > | That looks about right, Skylar. Jared and I were talking about it the other day, and it makes more sense the more you think about it. It takes a minute to remember that you aren't really meant to learn property or torts - these classes serve as sort of an extended Legal Methods class where substantive fields are used as vehicles. Its purpose sure fooled me, and the important stuff is hidden behind the gloss of substance. A semester long, pass/fail legal methods style class may be a more direct way to introduce students to these pillars without shifting student focus to substance before it's appropriate. Then, when you teach substantive classes you can begin in earnest.
On a related aside, I submit that, knowing nothing about law school or the legal profession before coming here, I am happy that there is virtually no course choice in the first year. If there was, advantage would be given to sons of lawyers and daughters of professors. You may not know the good "legal methods" classes to take.
-- AlexKonik - 19 Apr 2012 | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
LawSchoolasTrainingforHierarchy 20 - 19 Apr 2012 - Main.SkylarPolansky
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="Main.RohanGrey" |
I found this account of the law school experience by Professor Duncan Kennedy of Harvard Law to be relevant to our discussions in class, thought I’d share. | | I think this is a great idea as well and would love to be involved. I do think, however, that the Wiki would be a great place to share it, at least for the rest of the semester. I find that e-mail lists end up being very cloistered and exclusive. I think the really nice thing about the Wiki is that anyone can glean ideas/thoughts/etc. in an open space without any restrictions, and I would be surprised if Eben would be mind if we used this space to expand the number of opportunities we have to get involved.
-- JaredMiller - 02 Apr 2012
\ No newline at end of file | |
> > | Below is Professor Moglen's ideal 1L schedule, to add to the list we started composing. I tried to transcribe what Professor Moglen said in class yesterday as best I could but I know I didn't get it word for word, so if somebody can show me where to find the class recordings or took better notes than I did, please correct what I have:
The overall structure of 1L year would be "Principles of liability in the common law."
1. Contract Liability
- Contracts is about how to allocate risk with respect to things we expect. It is about protecting our expectations.
2. Tort Liability
- Torts is about how to deal with planning for the things we don't expect. It is about what to do about the public planning for things people don't expect to happen - rat poison exploding, etc.
3. Property Liability
- Property is interesting as a domain of civil law liability because property mixes contracts and torts and therefore should be taught in the second semester or should be dealt with as a way of checking the understanding of the first two. It is the combination of "one day my son this will be yours" and "you can't build a tannery next to a schoolyard"
Professors should teach all of this at once and later have a series of courses about more specific doctrinal areas - commercial transactions, mass torts, etc. The central spine of the thing could be articulated best by separating it from the other parts.
-- SkylarPolansky - 18 Apr 2012 | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
LawSchoolasTrainingforHierarchy 19 - 02 Apr 2012 - Main.JaredMiller
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="Main.RohanGrey" |
I found this account of the law school experience by Professor Duncan Kennedy of Harvard Law to be relevant to our discussions in class, thought I’d share. | | Meagan and Angeline,
After reflecting on my post over the weekend, I think that to uphold the integrity of the Wiki (serving as a place to reflect on class readings and discussions) it would be better if we create an email list so that we can send each other opportunities that we become aware of. If anyone else is interested feel free to email me so that I can include you on the mailing list. It's great to hear that you guys are interested! -- AbiolaFasehun - 02 Apr 2012
\ No newline at end of file | |
> > | Abiola,
I think this is a great idea as well and would love to be involved. I do think, however, that the Wiki would be a great place to share it, at least for the rest of the semester. I find that e-mail lists end up being very cloistered and exclusive. I think the really nice thing about the Wiki is that anyone can glean ideas/thoughts/etc. in an open space without any restrictions, and I would be surprised if Eben would be mind if we used this space to expand the number of opportunities we have to get involved.
-- JaredMiller - 02 Apr 2012 | | \ No newline at end of file |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|