ILNews

ABA Legal Education Task Force calls for law school innovation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The American Bar Association Task Force for the Future of Legal Education, led by Randall Shepard, retired chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, issued its draft report Friday, Sept. 20, with recommendations for improving law schools.

The 38-page report largely mirrors a working paper the task force issued in August. According to task force reporter and former Valparaiso Law School Dean Jay Conison, this draft reflects incremental improvements the committee made in response to comments since the working paper’s publication.

“My view is the task force has taken on an extremely difficult project,” Conison said. “It worked extremely hard and very thoughtfully to attempt to understand both the internal problems and challenges, and the many integrated opportunities for improvement.”

Throughout the report, the task force encourages law schools to become more innovative and increase the heterogeneity of programs. Related to that recommendation, the task force suggested the ABA eliminate or “substantially” liberalize standards that, for example, mandate students must spend three years in law school or restrict credit for paid internships.

The task force report encourages law schools to try new and improved ways of delivering legal education that benefit students and possibly lowers costs, Conison said. How much innovation and what kinds of risks to take will be something schools will have to sort out on their own.

Other key conclusions include:
•    Re-engineering the way legal education is priced and funded.
•    Putting more emphasis on skills training, experiential learning and practice-related competencies.
•    Developing new frameworks for licensing providers of legal services, potentially allowing individuals who do not hold a law degree to deliver limited legal services.

Conison believes the final recommendations of the task force could bring fundamental changes.

“This has the potential of having enormous benefit on legal education,” he said.

The task force is soliciting public comment on the draft report which will be used to help the panel prepare a final report scheduled to be submitted in November. This document will be considered by the ABA House of Delegates in February 2014. Neither the draft report nor the final report represents the policy or positions of the ABA.

According to Conison, reactions to the working paper have been thoughtful and analytical. The task force has worked to reconcile competing recommendations from the public.

Shepard will be talking about the future of legal education when he delivers the Clynes Chair Lecture at 4 p.m., Sept. 25, at the University of Notre Dame Law School.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT