Tomorrows Lawyers Need More Than The Book-Learnin.

In recent years, there has been much debate about the traditional legal education model’s effectiveness in preparing new lawyers for the practice of law.  Well, in reality, various stakeholders in the legal industry have been debating this for years.  New life was breathed into the conversation by the 2007 release of the Carnegie Foundation’s report, Educating Lawyers: Preparing for the Profession of Law.  Among the report’s major recommendations was an increased emphasis on experiential learning in law school curricula.

Fuel was added to the fire when the bottom dropped out of the legal employment market in 2008.  Suddenly, in a hyper-competitive job market,  everyone was talking about whether law schools could produce more practice-ready practitioners by bolstering experiential learning programs.  The PSLawNet Blog has been very interested in this discussion because so many experiential learning programs have public service dimensions to them, e.g. clinicals, externships, pro bono programs, etc.  So we’re pleased to note that our colleagues at NALP have released a report based on our 2010 Survey of Law School Experiential Learning Opportunities and Benefits.  The survey was distributed to law firm associates, with various experience levels, at firms around the country, and garnered over 900 responses.  (It’s noteworthy that we didn’t survey public interest lawyers, and subsequent research that we conduct may target this group.  In any event the report’s findings speak to what kind of experiential learning programs associates value most as having made them better practitioners.)

The report indicates that experiential learning opportunities, such as clinics and externships, are growing in popularity, as more recent law school graduates reported higher rates of participation than earlier graduates. And, whether required or optional, most of the simulated learning opportunities law schools offer are instrumental in preparing new associates for the demands of the practice of law reports the National Law Journal of the NALP research.

The report compares the various experiential opportunities to determine their effects on lawyer preparedness.  While only 30 percent of the associates reported participating in at least one legal clinic, almost two in three of these folks (63%) found the experience “very useful,” the highest value on a scale of 1-to-4.   Similarly, 36% of the associates said they took part in an externship or field placement, and 60% of them rated the experience “very useful.”

Seventy percent of the associates took at least one legal skills class during law school,  but only about 36 percent found the courses to “very useful.”

The ABA Journal also released an article about the research, making pro bono participation its lead.  NALP’s research revealed that 42% of the associates participated in pro bono work during law school; most spent less than 40 hours on the volunteer work.  And interestingly, only 17 percent of those who spent time on pro bono found it to be “very useful.”  (Contrast that against the clinic and extern stats.)

One thing to note about law students’  pro bono participation is that pro bono work categorically is often quite varied.  In parsing out students’ pro bono experiences instead of examining them in the aggregate, one might reach more specific conclusions about how well pro bono work affects preparedness to practice law.  For instance, some pro bono work is done through the auspices of a rigorous law school program with considerable oversight and supervision.  This experience would be closer to an externship or clinic experience, we think.  A lot of pro bono, though, it not nearly as well structured, and this may account for its relatively thin “usefulness” numbers.

Check out the report for yourself and share your thoughts in the Comments section.