National Jurist - October 2008 - (Page 50) DISTURBINGTHEPEACE Law schools, legal employers tend to rush things ean Socrates strides to the podium, smiles broadly, and welcomes the freshly matriculated first years. “It’s my privilege to welcome the Class of 2011, winners in a rigorous admissions process. You are the most accomplished incoming class in our history, boasting national awards, the highest LSAT scores and the highest undergraduate GPAs. Please know that we have an open-door policy and that we want you to get the most out of your legal education.” Every fall, those welcomBy Jon Peters ing words reverberate throughout law schools as apprehensive, idealistic first-year students join the ranks of the slightly battered second-year students, and the been-there-donethat third year students. It’s a generally thoughtful and well-received message. However, betraying those words are deeds that quickly display an underlying problem in legal education, as if to add to the welcoming message: “We and prospective employers like to rush things, and often ask you to do something before providing you an adequate roadmap or the dose of perspective necessary to do it.” First, many law schools, if not most, send first-year students straight into substantive law classes, without introducing the students to the foundation of the American legal system from which the first-year curriculum emerges. That kind of introduction, in a course or seminar, would provide a forum to consider the big-picture questions that tend to get lost or neglected in subjectspecific courses. It would facilitate professional maturation, giving students a better idea of 1) from where they came, 2) where they’re going, and 3) why. It would underscore the reasons we spend long nights and weekends at the library — sometimes wondering why in the hell we went to law school. And it would improve personal self-awareness, better preparing students to find a fitting job, as good decisions spring from informed perspectives. Second, the problem morphs during the summer after the first year, particularly for those who land legal internships and plan to participate in on-campus interviews. It’s become common for those interns, while working, to begin interviewing for the following summer. It’s awfully unwise to design a system that forces students to hedge their attention between a current employer and a prospective employer, all while negotiating the transition from coursework to real work. It should go without saying that the current employer deserves the student’s full time and attention. 50 Further, interviewing so early is bound to create conflicts of interest. While those are sometimes unavoidable problems in the real world, they are largely avoidable in law school. Simply pushing back the application and interview calendar to mid-August would serve that purpose, without delaying unduly the OCI process. Third, many well-meaning employers rush things in interviews. For example, we’re often asked as first-year students and rising second-year students, “In what area would you like to practice? Litigation, transactional?” Bless the few who know. The rest of us are thinking, “I’ve taken basic survey courses, and I haven’t taken trial practice or lawyering skills.” Accordingly, the premature question paints most students into a corner, essentially leaving them two alternative answers, assuming they want to be honest: 1) I don’t have the experience and perspective necessary to say in what area I’d like to practice, or 2) I hope that I can explore a variety of areas working for you, but I’m happy to focus in any area that would help meet your needs. It seems unfair to put so many students in that position. With all that in mind, a few final words: If administrators hope to be taken seriously when they say they want us get the most out of our legal education, they should reform the policies and practices that rush things and create avoidable problems. Quite simply, they should make their deed as good as their word. Jon Peters, an award-winning columnist and student editor of The National Jurist, is a Leadership Scholar at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. E-mail him at peters.401@osu.edu THE NATIONAL JURIST October 2008
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.