Paul L. Caron

Friday, September 13, 2013

Responses to Bruce Ackerman's WaPo Op-Ed: Law School Should Last for Three Years

Following up on last week's post on the Washington Post op-ed by Bruce Ackerman (Yale), Why Legal Education Should Last for Three Years:

Legal Education | Permalink


I keep trying to post a lengthier response to these stories, but the page refreshes and I lose everything.

In short, the third-year option seems like the way to go. For the marginal law student that is destined for soft-tissue injury plaintiffs work, why even have a third year? How much is actually gained through advanced topics discussions? For the lawyer that wishes to specialize in a complex field, the third year is absolutely essential for that specialization. And if a student can't get the classes she needs in her current JD program, why not let her transfer to another school with a specialized LLM for the third year? Let law schools compete for the third year.

Posted by: HTA | Sep 13, 2013 7:25:25 AM

I found Ackerman convincing and well-reasoned: but then, I went to Yale.

Posted by: michael livingston | Sep 13, 2013 3:17:34 AM