New York Law Journal: Law Schools, April 27 2009

The Rankings

What Frims Want

school, most of our respondents think it should be maintained. As Emily Busse explains:

“The third year provides

a valuable opportunity for students to become acquainted with substantive areas of law. Without it, students will have less opportunity to identify their interest in and aptitude for specific disciplines.”

Our respondents believe that the third year’s emphasis should change, though, to more clinical and practical work. That seems to have been part of the motivation behind Stanford’s “3D” JD, which allows second- and third-year students to take courses in other disciplines, engage in more team-oriented problem-solving exercises, and pursue expanded clinical opportunities (including litigating cases and representing clients).

To make it easier for students to take outside courses, the law school changed its academic calendar, which had been on the traditional semester system, to the quarter system to match the rest of the university. As stated on the Stanford Web site:

“Although lawyers were historically called upon and trained mainly to identify problems, they are increasingly being called upon to help solve them. To do this, especially in a world where the problems have grown more intricate, lawyers need to understand what their clients do at a much more sophisticated level than can be taught through the existing law

school curriculum or in the traditional law school classroom.”

In addition to cross-disciplinary studies, the hiring partner of a major D.C. firm believes law students should have more real-world experiences before graduation: “I’m beginning to think that most or all of the third year should be spent working as an apprentice to a practicing attorney.”

Not surprisingly, no one we surveyed thinks that a fourth year should be added. As one litigation partner observes, “There’s only so much you can learn in the classroom. At some point, you just have to start doing.” •