I just mean that as long as there is a curve, students will always get As despite how much they really learned. Thus, it doesn't really matter if one is a good teacher. For example, secondary schools have end of grade tests and diagnostics at the beginning of the school year to assess how much students have learned and they hold teachers accountable for those results. Also, there is constant feedback throughout the year to assess one's growth toward their learning goals. Law schools could learn from this model.

I didn't say all teachers are lazy, but the current system does not put that much emphasis on the student and what he/she wants. I would vouch that the majority of students would likely want a more interactive experience in law school during 1L year, despite how well they have done. I really like Eben's class, and the reason why I said he gives us feedback every single day is because his class was devoted toward teaching us how to be the best contemporary lawyers we could be during each one of his class sessions. Especially when you engaged him in class, as I did often, you learn a lot about your journey as a lawyer and how you can move closer to passing the imagination test. That's why I do not think that statement was a copout. We received feedback on exactly what we were being assessed on.

Although you could figure out how to be successful, most teachers of our substantive classes did not provide much feedback in terms of preparing us for the final assessment. I actually enjoyed the Socratic method, but that really did not prepare us for a three to four hour written exam. I actually would like to see more take home exams, which would better replicate legal practice. Law school should not be about having to teach yourself. I have taught before and my students would not have done well having to figure it out on their own. Two of my one 1L substantive classes, Con Law with Metzger and Civ. Pro. with Gluck were moving in the right direction with feedback, but more can still be done. In Metzger's class for instance, although an 100+ section, there was a TA session every week and a large portion of the sessions were devoted to discussing sample exam questions. To go further, it would have been beneficial to turn in one sample question answer before exams to see if we were progressing in the right direction. I realize that more resources would be needed to do this, but I know more can be done especially in our small sections.

When I say real lawyers, I mean those lawyers that actually want to create positive change in society and are not just invested in a paycheck. Those lawyers want to be properly trained and do not throw their morals (whatever they may be) to the wayside when they pick a job.

Lab hours are more frequent and hands on, but I understand what you are saying about LPW. However, I think our LPW class can be better and should therefore be more frequent.

More practical training now would be moving in the right direction. I think class sections could be supplemented with practicums, even if they are only a few times per semester. 1L year, considering the fact that it is so important, should have assessments that really reflect legal practice. And if these assessments do not yet, in the meantime more feedback should be provided so students can receive the best education possible and no one would be left at a disservice/disadvantage.

Yeah ... it is a timing issue and an evaluation issue. Employers should not look for canned meat after the first year, especially if the current system persists. Also, 1L year should be intermixed with theoretical and practical training to give students an optimal education in the first year. 2L and 3L year offer more practical classes and if you are proactive you can likely get a lot of them. That's why I don't think law school has to end now, but the training should be much more conducive to preparing students for the legal profession. I care more about learning than the final grade, but I realize everyone is not like me. I just want to be the best lawyer I can be, and do not want my classmates to miss out on a great education either.

Also, law schools should understand that everyone doesn't learn the same way. They should work to diversify the learning experience. I enjoyed Socratic method, but every class doesn't have to be that way.

As a teacher I had to hold myself accountable for my students learning, so that is why I am really invested in the education now in law school.

Honestly, I think we want similar things but we just have different visions of how to get there. But I do know that the 1L education can get better. Dean Schizer has already informed me how it has improved over the last few years, and he seems optimistic about improvement in the future.

-- WilliamDavidWilliams - 11 Jul 2012