Balkinization   |
Balkinization
Balkinization Symposiums: A Continuing List                                                                E-mail: Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts Bring Back Apprenticeships
|
Monday, May 23, 2011
Bring Back Apprenticeships
Gerard N. Magliocca
I've read Brian's posts on the escalating costs of legal education with interest, as the debt burden that law schools impose on our students is an issue that many people are concerned about. I'm not an administrator, so I'm not sure that I have a good handle on what should be done, but here is one idea that is worth discussing: the revival of apprenticeships as an alternative to law school.
Comments:
In the course of a research project on the 1850s in Boston and the abolitionist movement, I learned something about legal apprenticeships. Apparently there were limited standards on such in MA. Local bar associations established some rules, including in Boston, limiting the number of apprenticeships an attorney might have at any one time, not for the sake of the apprentices necessarily but to limit the stream of new attorneys that might create a glut of attorneys to the detriment of those then in practice. Lysander Spooner studied the law and through his challenge in 1836, the Supreme Judicial Court revised some of its rules that had benefitted law school grads over apprentices on admissions to practice. It is important to point out that apprentices performed scut work for their mentors and also often paid the mentor, creating a profit center for the mentor.
So bringing back apprenticeships would need some ground rules to protect not only the apprentices and the integrity of the bar, but also the public. This might fit into a states rights situation, involving the state government through its courts and legislation, which might result in potential apprentices states shopping. I may have more comments later on, as this is an interesting subject. Hopefully we won't end up with a reality TV show on the subject in the manner of Donald Trump.
My, my. That is a shot across the bow of the progressive credentialed monopoly model.
In an age where hair stylists are licensed in the name of consumer protection, I think you are facing a bit of an uphill fight.
This:
"My, my. That is a shot across the bow of the progressive credentialed monopoly model." sounds like a shot from a wanna-be libertarian. Was it progressives that started law schools? Were bar associations the product of progressives?
Andrew from Africa. Is there such an under-supply of lawyers that its vital to ensure that large numbers continue to join the profession?
I am from a British Commonwealth jurisdiction that requires apprenticeships, known at the time by appropriately Dickensian title of "Articles of Clerkship". Apprenticeship is required for all aspirant attorneys, two years for those who have a law degree, five for those without a law degree. It would be good to take a hard look at systems like this before concluding that apprenticeships teach anyone anything. It may have been that in times past when attorneys saw themselves as engaged in an honorable profession that they ensured that their charges learned something. Attorneys who understand themselves as in a ruthless market driven competition focused on the bottom line do not prove to be good teachers. Apprentices are made to perform work that does not prepare them for the profession. Are apprenticeships about practical skills? Sure, if your idea of practical skills is learning how to drive around town delivering documents, fetching the bosses car from the body shop, None of it prepares apprentices to be good lawyers. And Bar exams don't change that. They are, after all just exams and whether one has a law degree or not the best preparation for them is a preparation course. Here is where the comparison with jurisdictions that require apprenticeships is useful again. They mostly require that those who are going to take bar exams must complete a preparation course for the bar exam. This shows that apprenticeships aren't very useful as preparation for bar exams. Of course one can counter that bar exams aren't very good indicators of whether someone has the skills necessary to practice as an attorney. But there is no empirical evidence from jurisdictions that require apprenticeships that they prepare participants to be better attorneys. Instead it might be more useful to take another look at bar exams and discuss how they could better reflect whether one has the skills to practice.
I understand that NJ required not only a law degree and a bar exam, but an apprenticeship for a year or so with a practicing attorney before being permitted to practice law. This goes back to the late 1950s when I met while in the military several fellow draftee attorneys from NJ.
With regard to law office training, John Adams was so trained in the office of a prominent attorney but Adams complained that the latter did not spend much time or effort with him, such that he learned from extensive reading on his own. There were no uniform standards.
BD: "My, my. That is a shot across the bow of the progressive credentialed monopoly model."
Shag: Was it progressives that started law schools? Were bar associations the product of progressives? Law schools predated progressivism. Requirements that lawyers attend certified law schools and take bar exams are definitely progressive policies.
If we're open to radical changes, why not bring back a bachelor's degree in law? A state school -- San Jose State, for example -- could permit students to study law, just as they might study accounting or business. We'd see far more socio-economic diversity, far less debt, and a more democratic path to the bar. I know that the ABA accredited schools would be the big losers if we opened up a second path to the law, but the public could be a big winner.
For this answer to my query:
"Requirements that lawyers attend certified law schools and take bar exams are definitely progressive policies." I would ask for supporting cites. The ABA and Boston Bar Association were quite conservative back in the 1950s and previously, when both certifications of law schools and bar exams were established. **** JohnSteele's comment on a radical change might suggest legal training as a trade school. For quite a few years, there were law schools that required no college for admission. Here in MA, that was the case until the early 1940s. There then were established pre-legal studies of two-years for admission to law school, expanded to a college degree in the late 1960s early 1970s. One of the goals seemed to be to control the increasing number of admissions to the bar post WW II, as practicing attorneys were a rather conservative bunch protective of their own pocketbooks. (Some have compared this to the medical profession.)
I think the apprenticeship model is a really good idea. With fewer lawyers burdened with huge student loans, these attorney's would have more freedom to afford to serve people who are currently underrepresented in our society.
In a few years, when I am eligible, I might consider taking on some apprentices in my practice here in California.
Andrew said ...
"Attorneys who understand themselves as in a ruthless market driven competition focused on the bottom line do not prove to be good teachers." Law professors who understand themselves to be in a ruthless academic market where professional advancement and reputation are tied exclusively to scholarly production don't prove to be good teachers either. "Apprentices are made to perform work that does not prepare them for the profession. Are apprenticeships about practical skills? Sure, if your idea of practical skills is learning how to drive around town delivering documents, fetching the bosses car from the body shop, None of it prepares apprentices to be good lawyers." The same can be said of being a research assistant, bluebooking law review articles, taking extremely time constrained issue spotting exams, participating in Socratic method dialog, etc. "And Bar exams don't change that. They are, after all just exams and whether one has a law degree or not the best preparation for them is a preparation course." I agree. The bar exams are completely worthless no matter what preceded them. I see them as little different than hazing.
This is an issue that actually arose between some friends recently. In Virginia there's actually a "law reader" program that serves as a 3 year apprenticeship. I believe several other states have similar programs.
As I understand it, you can't accept pay during the period of the law apprenticeship -- which opens to door for abuse, and which undoubtedly limits the pool that is likely to be willing and able to participate in that kind of program -- but it still is a less expensive route than going to law school. Law readers don't pass the bar at the same rate, but some still do. The consensus that the friends came to was that the only truly essential year in law school is the first year. Formal law school training gives a person a nice broad base to work from, but the apprenticeship allows a person to hit the ground running much faster in whatever specialization he or she ends up going into. Additionally, if you're going into a small family practice instead of a large corporate law firm, there are additional challenges associated with running a small business that you need to know. Hands on experience under those circumstances is likely to be an even greater asset.
JPRS2010 has a good idea. A program that gave students one year of academic legal training, plus two years of an apprenticeship type experience seems like it would prepare students better at a lower cost. Worth a try, anyway.
Before becoming too enamored with apprenticeship, focus on the lawyer-mentor side. I've been in private practice since 1954 and had a good law practice. Looking back, I wonder if I could have devoted sufficient time to mentor an apprentice and maintain my practice, financial and family commitments. For me the law was indeed a jealous mistress. So commenters favoring apprenticeships who have been actively practicing law, give us some idea of the balancing required to maintaining a profitable practice and personal, family life. Yes, large law firms might be able to do this by passing on the apprenticeship costs to their clients by way of fees, but a solo or small partnership might not be able to do so.
And the other side of the coin is that of the apprentice. How can he/she be assured that the mentor lawyer is actually capable and committed to the requisite training unless there are standards established? And who would establish and enforce the standards? For in the end, the goal is to train lawyers who will be qualified to serve their clients. Presumably for transparency purposes an apprenticeship-trained lawyer would disclose the apprenticeship arrangement to clients.
Bradley, I am glad that we are agreed on the worthlessness of Bar exams.
You also make a great point when you refer to how law professors are also too market driven. If you think that law professors are too market driven to teach as well as they could then you will agree with me that that situation won't be remedied by As someone who has experienced both law school and apprenticeship I can vouch that "being a research assistant, bluebooking law review articles, taking extremely time constrained issue spotting exams, participating in Socratic method dialog, etc." were, however inadequate much much more useful to legal practice than experience as a messenger, copy machine mechanic, typist etc which is what one gets as an apprentice.
According to the Economist "After a dozen years of growth, employment in America’s law industry, the world’s biggest, has declined for the past three years."
Post a Comment
http://www.economist.com/node/18651114 So I would ask who apprenticeships would benefit? Who in the legal profession would benefit from cheap, lower skilled labour? Andrew
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin’s Press, 2022) Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |