1
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: UC Hastings v. Cardozo. Still undecided...
« on: September 12, 2011, 10:01:54 PM »
Dear Dean Wu,
I read your article "Value of Legal Education" with great interest. In fact, I am taking a leave of absence this semester to reconsider the value of legal education. I am an older student with extensive professional experience. Given my 1L experience at Hastings, I agree with your fundamental point that legal education should be reformed.
I do not deny that during my year at Hastings I have had genuine learning experiences. However, I believe that they are outweighed by exactly those experiences that have led others to conclude -- perhaps too harshly -- that "legal educators are scarcely better than con artists." For example, one course was canceled mid-semester due to students' concerns and complaints about the instructor's competency. For the same reason, halfway into the spring semester, after some bureaucratic wrangling, I transferred to a different 1L section for another course. I regret not doing the same for several other courses.
I believe your enthusiasm for reforming legal education is shared by many (at least those professors, attorneys, and students I've talked to). The question is really the extent of the reform. I doubt that there are many who would repudiate the century-old case method and its Harvard derivation. I doubt there are many who would advocate for the apprenticeship model (despite law office study programs in seven states) and reading Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England -- as Daniel Webster and Abraham Lincoln did in their time. Legal education, for better or for worse, has become institutionalized.
I was formally educated at one of the top institutions in the country. I also have been employed by sizable organizations. I understand how an institution's priorities can be reflected in the ease or the difficulty of certain tasks. For example, earlier in the summer, I received an email from you urging me to reconsider transferring to another school. I was impressed with the efficiency with which my visit to the registrar's office had triggered your immediate attention. Your prompt email, in response to my transcript request, certainly reflects the institutional and business imperative in retaining students.
However, my attempts at obtaining historical data of Pacer survey results have been repeatedly frustrated. Without such data I cannot assess whether student feedback is actually helping professors improve as teachers. What I had hoped to see is a general increase in teaching quality.
I do not know how Hastings is encouraging its professors to be more receptive to suggestions by students. Paradigms and polemics aside, I do like your idea that "an office has to be created to compile the numbers." I believe Hastings can benefit from such self-scrutiny.
Sincerely,
[stluan]
I read your article "Value of Legal Education" with great interest. In fact, I am taking a leave of absence this semester to reconsider the value of legal education. I am an older student with extensive professional experience. Given my 1L experience at Hastings, I agree with your fundamental point that legal education should be reformed.
I do not deny that during my year at Hastings I have had genuine learning experiences. However, I believe that they are outweighed by exactly those experiences that have led others to conclude -- perhaps too harshly -- that "legal educators are scarcely better than con artists." For example, one course was canceled mid-semester due to students' concerns and complaints about the instructor's competency. For the same reason, halfway into the spring semester, after some bureaucratic wrangling, I transferred to a different 1L section for another course. I regret not doing the same for several other courses.
I believe your enthusiasm for reforming legal education is shared by many (at least those professors, attorneys, and students I've talked to). The question is really the extent of the reform. I doubt that there are many who would repudiate the century-old case method and its Harvard derivation. I doubt there are many who would advocate for the apprenticeship model (despite law office study programs in seven states) and reading Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England -- as Daniel Webster and Abraham Lincoln did in their time. Legal education, for better or for worse, has become institutionalized.
I was formally educated at one of the top institutions in the country. I also have been employed by sizable organizations. I understand how an institution's priorities can be reflected in the ease or the difficulty of certain tasks. For example, earlier in the summer, I received an email from you urging me to reconsider transferring to another school. I was impressed with the efficiency with which my visit to the registrar's office had triggered your immediate attention. Your prompt email, in response to my transcript request, certainly reflects the institutional and business imperative in retaining students.
However, my attempts at obtaining historical data of Pacer survey results have been repeatedly frustrated. Without such data I cannot assess whether student feedback is actually helping professors improve as teachers. What I had hoped to see is a general increase in teaching quality.
I do not know how Hastings is encouraging its professors to be more receptive to suggestions by students. Paradigms and polemics aside, I do like your idea that "an office has to be created to compile the numbers." I believe Hastings can benefit from such self-scrutiny.
Sincerely,
[stluan]