Obama Says Law School Should Be Two, Not Three, Years!!!
President Obama urged law schools on Friday to consider cutting a year of classroom instruction, wading into a hotly debated issue inside the beleaguered legal academy.
This is probably controversial to say, but what the heck. I am in my second term, so I can say it, Mr. Obama said at a town hall-style meeting at Binghamton University in New York. I believe that law schools would probably be wise to think about being two years instead of three years. . .
On Friday, he questioned the utility of a third year of classes and suggested that students use their final two semesters to gain work experience. In the first two years, young people are learning in the classroom, Mr. Obama said. The third year, theyd be better off clerking or practicing in a firm even if they werent getting paid that much, but that step alone would reduce the costs for the student.
He acknowledged that eliminating a third year could possibly hurt a law schools finances and ability to maintain a strong faculty. Now, the question is, Mr. Obama said, can law schools maintain quality and keep good professors and sustain themselves without that third year? My suspicion is, is that if they thought creatively about it, they probably could.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/obama-says-law-school-should-be-two-years-not-three/?hp
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)undeterred
(34,658 posts)elleng
(130,905 posts)erpowers
(9,350 posts)I think there is too much information for students to learn for it to be cramped into two years. In addition, students can clerk and get other experience during their summers.
its the method we learn in law school, and then we go out to 'PRACTICE' law.
There's obviously no way we could learn everything about every area of law in school, so the basics AND a good foundation in the method is necessary for 'schooling,' imo.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It's more about learning how to reason and how to research.
So notorious as I am for agreeing with Obama, this makes sense. The main problem with law school is that it is not much like real practice. One the theory is learned, practice would be good for the third year. Like an internship.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You end up learning how to actually do your job at your first firm, anyways.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)But it does sound like a lot is crammed into three years.
I know for the 54 credits I have to take for my DBA it would be hard to cram it down to 3 years. I'm right at the 3 year mark and going into my comprehensives next week. Thankfully we have up to 7 years.
Igel
(35,309 posts)Students work, want to take it slow. Evening classes.
With all the terror-alerts about the massive indebtedness a lot of kids are saying "no" to college.
That's the wrong answer for those who would finish. It's precisely the right answer for those who would drop out. A better answer is to not drop out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/business/economy/dropping-out-of-college-and-paying-the-price.html?pagewanted=all
Manifestor_of_Light
(21,046 posts)Took me five years to earn my JD. Eleven semesters. I was working full time at the courthouse as a court reporter & typing my transcripts and going to night school. I thought it would help me get a job as a paralegal training trial lawyers, since I've seen a jillion hearings.
Didn't help me get a job.....
The main problem I have is
the lack of feedback on how well you know the material. There's a final exam and that's all. You make 3 F's and you're out, as well.
Horrifically scary. Some teachers made sure the curve was a flat 70. If they were generous the center point of the curve might be a 73. Horrendously competitive.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)There should be less law schools, period. When you compare the actual earnings for those not in white-shoe firms to their debt burden, it's a giant scam. Rather than pumping out lawyers more quickly, the focus should be on pumping out less lawyers.
Gus Lammas
(61 posts)Preceded by TWO years in our latest combat zone, which just might purge the bullshit from their systems.