scholarly journals A NEW MINORITY? International JD Students in US Law Schools

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (03) ◽  
pp. 647-678 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swethaa S. Ballakrishnen ◽  
Carole Silver
Keyword(s):  
International Students ◽  
Minority Students ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
School Environments ◽  
Ways Of Being ◽  
International Status

This Article reveals the significance of a new and growing minority group within US law schools—international students in the Juris Doctor (JD) program. While international students have received some attention in legal education scholarship, it mostly has been focused on their participation in the context of programs specially designed for this demographic (e.g. postgraduate programs like the LLM and SJD). Drawing from interview data with fifty-eight international JD students across seventeen graduating US law schools, our research reveals the rising importance of international students as actors within a more mainstream institutional context. In examining the ways these students navigate their law school environments, we find that although international status often impacts identity and participation, not all students encounter its impact similarly. Particularly, while some students use the identity to their advantage, others cannot escape negative implications, even with effort. This is consistent with other scholarship on minority students, and adds to a growing literature that uses their socialization experiences to better understand professional stratification. To unpack these different ways of “being international,” we borrow from Goffman’s theorization of stigma to suggest illustrative variations in the ways international students experience their environments. In doing so, we offer an introductory landscape to better understand this growing population and hope this enables new insights to theorize about other kinds of minority experience.

Affirmative Action and Aboriginal Government: The Case for Legal Education in Nunavut

1999 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 21-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Gallagher-Mackay
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Critical Mass ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Disadvantaged Communities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Education Gap ◽  
The University ◽  
And Training

AbstractThe Nunavut Land Claim Agreement commits federal and territorial governments to the recruitment and training of Inuit for positions throughout government. In the justice sector, there is currently a major shortage of Inuit lawyers or future judges. However, there also appears to be a fundamental mismatch between what existing law schools offer and what Inuit students are prepared to accept. A northern-based law school might remedy some of these problems. However, support for a law school requires un-thinking certain key tenets of legal education as we know it in Canada. In particular, it may require a step outside the university-based law school system. Universities appear to be accepted as the exclusive guardian of the concept of academic standards. Admission standards, in particular, serve as both a positivist technology of exclusion, and a political rationale for the persistence of majoritarian institutions as the major means of training members of disadvantaged communities. Distinctive institutions – eventually working with university-based law schools – have the potential to help bridge the education gap between Inuit and other Canadians. In so doing, they have the potential to train a critical mass of Inuit to meaningfully adapt the justice system to become a pillar of the public government in the Inuit homeland of Nunavut.

scholarly journals A Medical/Legal Teaching and Assessment Collaboration on Domestic Violence: Assessment Using Standardized Patients/Standardized Clients

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoinette Sedillo Lopez ◽  
Cameron Crandall ◽  
Gabriel Campos ◽  
Diane Rimple ◽  
Mary Neidhart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Standardized Patients ◽  
Law School ◽  
Learning Objectives ◽  
Carnegie Foundation ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Knowledge And Skills ◽  
Education Association ◽  
Standardized Clients

<p>Assessment of skills is an important, emerging topic in law school education. Two recent and influential books, Educating Lawyers published by the Carnegie Foundation and Best Practices in Legal Education, published by the Clinical Legal Education Association have both suggested dramatic reform of legal education. Among other reforms, these studies urge law schools to use “outcome-based” assessments, i.e., using learning objectives  and assessing knowledge and skills in standardized situations based on specific criteria, rather than simply comparing students’ performances to each other. </p>

scholarly journals Law School as Social Innovation

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 225
Author(s):  
Lorne Sossin
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Social Innovation ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Rapid Change ◽  
Law School ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
The Face

Legal education is in the midst of a range of challenges and disruptions. This address outlines these dynamics, and explores the potential of social innovation as a model for law schools which both responds to current challenges and enhances resilience in the face of disruption. By reframing legal education as facing outward, and advancing its public interest mandate through partnerships, collaboration and academic initiatives designed to solve social problems, law schools can enhance the student learning experience, generate new forms of legal knowledge and thrive at a time of rapid change. Address delivered at the Australian Law Teachers Association (ALTA) 2016 Conference in Wellington on 8 July 2016.

Innovation and Disruption: Exploring the Potential of Clinical Legal Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-32
Author(s):  
Mary Anne Noone
Keyword(s):  
Digital Technology ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
Law School ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Government Decision ◽  
Growing Body ◽  
Clinical Program ◽  
Real Challenge

It’s a great privilege to deliver this year’s Susan Campbell Oration. I, like many others, had the pleasure of working with Sue on a range of activities. In 2007, Sue conducted a review of the La Trobe Law School Clinical program which was instrumental in helping ensure the program remained an integral aspect of the La Trobe University law course. I hope what I have to say honours Sue’s memory and her contributions to legal education and clinical legal education in particular2.  My focus in this presentation is on how Australian clinical legal education responds to the various innovations and disruptions occurring in the legal arena. The scope and breadth of innovations is mindboggling. There are many predictions about what the future holds for the legal profession, from gloom and doom to utopia, and there is a growing body of literature discussing the implications for the legal profession and legal education. In reality, it is impossible to envisage what the legal world will look like in ten years let alone thirty and that poses a real challenge for those involved in legal education, including clinical legal education. How best to prepare today’s students for the unknown future?  Given that I have no expertise in digital technology and am certainly not a futurologist my comments relate to those areas about which I have some background: access to justice, social security and clinical legal education.  I briefly outline the variety and scope of innovations occurring in the legal world, discuss two related aspects namely access to justice and government decision making, using the example of Robodebt, and then examine the potential for clinical legal education in these disruptive times. I argue that clinical legal education is well placed to take a more central role in Australian law schools and the training of 21st century legal workers. 

The Proliferation of Case Method Teaching in American Law Schools: Mr. Langdell's Emblematic “Abomination,” 1890-1915

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law School ◽  
Case Method ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
American Higher Education ◽  
American Law ◽  
Law Professors

Case method teaching was first introduced into American higher education in 1870 by Christopher C. Langdell (1826-1906) of Harvard Law School (HLS), where it became closely associated with—and emblematic of—a set of academic meritocratic reforms. Though regnant today, “the ultimate triumph of [Langdell's] system was not apparent” for many years. The vast majority of students, alumni, and law professors initially derided it as an “abomination,” and for two decades case method and the associated reforms were largely confined to Harvard. During the subsequent twenty-five years between 1890 and 1915, a national controversy ensued as to whether case method teaching—and the concomitant meritocratic reforms—would predominate in legal education and, ultimately, professional education in the United States.

scholarly journals Law School Learning Outcomes: Legal English Course Contribution

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-146
Author(s):  
Elena Vyushkina
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Oral Communication ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Legal Writing ◽  
American Law ◽  
Russian Law

Abstract Standards of professional legal education are developed by different organizations: in some countries these are governmental bodies, in others these are professional associations. Apart from a country these standards include Learning Outcomes which shape law schools’ curricula. Both American and European standards mention, to different extent, written and oral communication in the legal context, but a number and contents of subjects directed at developing and mastering professional communicative competency differ a lot. There are disciplines totally devoted to the competency named (e.g. legal writing) as well as courses in which communicative skills are an integral constituent for their successful completion (e.g. basis of negotiations/mediation/client consultation). The article goal is to find a place and role of a Legal English (LE) course in achieving learning outcomes connected with professional communicative competence. The methodology incorporated desk and field studies. The literature review is aimed at identifying current state of affairs in American law schools, as they provide first-class legal education recognized all over the world, and in Russian law schools, as the author works in this system and is interested in its development. A questionnaire was designed to explore Russian law school graduates’ assessment of practicality of subjects they had studied for their professional activities. The analysis of literature and Internet sources allowed to specify the ways of teaching written and oral communication in American law schools and to highlight the situation in Russian legal education. It shows that the Russian system is characterized by predominance of teaching theory of substantive and procedural rules of law and lack of curriculum disciplines aimed at cultivating skills and competencies. A survey of Russian law schools’ recent graduates indicates that most of communicative, in a broad sense, skills, which they use in their everyday work, were obtained within their LE classes. So, complementing a LE course with modules devoted to different aspects of legal writing and specific patterns of lawyer-client, lawyer-lawyer, lawyer-judge communication will definitely contribute to achieving learning outcomes which are put forward by legal education standards.

scholarly journals Responsible Solutions

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-245
Author(s):  
Jay Sterling Silver
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Economic Forces ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Conducting Research

At the end of Brian Tamanaha’s instant classic, Failing Law Schools, tracing the economic forces behind exorbitant law school tuition and graduate debt and unemployment, he lays out his plan to help resolve the crisis. He would eliminate tenure, dispense with the final year of law school, rely heavily on adjuncts and apprenticeships, and loosen the ABA accreditation standards mandating “one-size-fitsall” law schools to allow the marketplace to fashion more affordable models of legal education. Some schools would remain in the traditional, three-year mode, with faculty conducting research. Others would morph into, or spring up spontaneously as, the “law school parallel . . . of vocational colleges.” Very candidly, Tamanaha explained that the “two-year law schools . . . would be dumping grounds for the middle class and the poor . . . . Few children of the rich will end up in these law schools.” He calls the plan “‘differentiated’ legal education.” Others, including Paul Campos, founder of the Inside the Law School Scam web blog and author of Don’t Go To Law School (Unless), and the ABA Task Force (“Task Force”) on the Future of Legal Education, have endorsed Tamanaha’s prescription.

scholarly journals Legal Education Reform and the Good Lawyer

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Woolley
Keyword(s):  
Education Reform ◽  
Professional Identity ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Cautionary Note ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Large Lecture ◽  
Essential Function

The critics agree: law schools do it wrong. Stuck in early twentieth century practices that emphasize instruction in legal doctrine in large lecture halls, law schools fail to provide their students with the skills necessary to be practicing lawyers and to be marketable to prospective employers. They fail to instill in their students the “professional identity” necessary to achieve ethical legal practice. This article sounds a cautionary note with respect to those proposals for reform that reject the traditional emphasis on doctrinal teaching. In particular, and in contrast to the critics who view doctrinal learning as inconsistent with, or unrelated to, the creation of ethical lawyers, this article suggests that the emphasis on law in law school serves an essential function in creating ethical legal practice.

scholarly journals Marriage of convenience or a match made in heaven? Collaboration between a Law School Clinic and a Commercial Law Firm

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Margaret Castles
Keyword(s):  
Legal Education ◽  
Law School ◽  
Legal Services ◽  
Law Firm ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
Commercial Law ◽  
Student Demand ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Education Courses ◽  
Made In

The cost of clinical legal education courses has always been a challenge to law schools. In the last 40 years clinicians have developed and trialed many different innovations in clinical law, in response to increased student demand for clinical experience, and greater pressure on the legal services market. Two common models are the in house clinic and the externship placement. This article explores the idea of a ‘reverse externship’ – with private solicitors coming into an in house clinic to assist in the supervision of students on placement. It tracks the development and implementation of this initiative, and reports on both the practical challenges and the pedagogical benefits that we encountered<strong>.</strong>

The Disastrous First Fund-Raising Campaign in Legal Education: The Harvard Law School Centennial, 1914–1920

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-578
Author(s):  
Bruce A. Kimball
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fund Raising ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Students ◽  
New Venture ◽  
Law Schools ◽  
The Law ◽  
The University

Between 1915 and 1925, Harvard University conducted the first national public fund-raising campaign in higher education in the United States. At the same time, Harvard Law School attempted the first such effort in legal education. The law school organized its effort independently, in conjunction with its centennial in 1917. The university campaign succeeded magnificently by all accounts; the law school failed miserably. Though perfectly positioned for this new venture, Harvard Law School raised scarcely a quarter of its goal from merely 2 percent of its alumni. This essay presents the first account of this campaign and argues that its failure was rooted in longstanding cultural and professional objections that many of the school's alumni shared: law students and law schools neither need nor deserve benefactions, and such gifts worsen the overcrowding of the bar. Due to these objections, lethargy, apathy, and pessimism suffused the campaign. These factors weakened the leadership of the alumni association, the dean, and the president, leading to inept management, wasted time, and an unlikely strategy that was pursued ineffectively. All this doomed the campaign, particularly given the tragic interruptions of the dean's suicide and World War I, along with competition from the well-run campaigns for the University and for disaster relief due to the war.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document