Why won’t the legal education attackers admit their real vision?


I found this post about the future of law schools and the lack of integrity in the extremist attacks to be spot on!  What do you think?



3 Responses

  1. I would hardly call Paul Campos’ many writings on the status and future of legal education “extremist.” If his highly accurate and helpful assessments are “extremist” then I shudder to think what you make of all those F-bomb throwing discontented scambloggers like, for example, the always crudely over-the-top “Nando” at “Third Tier Reality.”
    – Mo

  2. This statement in Matt’s post is very questionable–“But smaller student-teacher ratios mean you are hiring more teachers, not more expensive ones, and tenure existed in the 1980s, too.” “Isn’t it better to have smaller classes?”

    As several comments to his post noted, are there more teachers or more professors doing scholarsip? His post has not given any evidence that class sizes are smaller. I doubt that class size has shrunk any for doctrinal courses.

  3. I think the commentators are right that much of Professor Campos’ work is enlightening. However, I think it is also fair to say that without putting forward a holistic alternative vision,he takes the easier route in commenting and can be interpreted as supporting extreme views. As to the issue of smaller classes, it is true that too many law school resources – professor time, perks, and pence – were focused on the legal academy as a laboratory for ideas at the expense of student learning during the late 90’s and 2000’s. That point is fair and is one of the reasons this BLOG was started. However, I don’t want us to swing wildly in another direction – which some Campos followers are doing – in which we evaluate law schools as if the development of lawyers was the same as the creation of widgets!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: