ILNews

Dean's Desk: Third year offers students opportunity to define, hone skills

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

dean-buxbaun-hannahOur profession is in the midst of an important conversation about legal education – one that encompasses the costs of that education, the employment opportunities for entry-level lawyers, and the curriculum that law schools offer.

One recurring proposal, championed most recently by President Obama, is to reduce law school from three years to two (or at least to grant schools the flexibility to offer two-year programs if they so choose). In considering this particular solution, it’s important to take a close look at how students are currently spending their third year. What we notice at the Maurer School of Law is that there is no uniform answer to this question. Of course, it’s not a surprise that students use their third year of study in different ways, and to different ends. They come to our school from a variety of personal, educational and professional backgrounds, and with a variety of career objectives in mind. And during the course of their studies here – including in our first-year class on the legal profession – they learn more about their own particular strengths and values, and how they align with potential career paths. Therefore, the third-year experience differs from student to student.

For example, some third-year students work in a clinic. Like most schools, we run a number of clinics that combine client representation or field work with an intensive academic component. Our Conservation Law Clinic, for instance, gives students the opportunity to work with staff attorneys at the Conservation Law Center, collaborating on cases involving natural resource law and policy. Students in the clinic draft legal documents and work on their presentation skills before administrative law judges. At the same time, they hone their skills in time management, collaboration, and research and writing. Clinic work is hands-on and fast-moving, and students who participate report that their research and writing skills improve immensely during the course of the semester.

Other students participate in full-semester externships in the public sector. Last spring, we had students working in Washington, D.C., for organizations including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Defender Service, and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. These externships not only provide hands-on training, but also expose students to additional substantive law in complex and specialized fields. In addition, they help students build the professional networks that enhance their placement prospects.

For some students, the most productive use of the third year involves additional coursework rather than experiential learning. Our 3Ls often return from their summer work experience with a much clearer picture of the gaps they need to fill before moving into permanent employment. After working as summer associates in law firms, some students realize that they need to improve their writing skills. So they take courses such as advanced legal writing, which builds on the mandatory first-year writing program and exposes students to a wide range of document types, including client letters and contracts. Other offerings in this area include transaction drafting, litigation drafting, and strategies in critical reading and writing.

Other students, finding that their career paths are more clearly defined by the beginning of their 3L year, devote that year to additional classes in particular substantive fields — classes that aren’t just more of the same from their second year, but that give them the richer set of doctrinal, analytical and professional competencies that will enable them to succeed in their chosen field. For students pursuing a career in intellectual property, for instance, the third year might include highly specialized classes such as IP antitrust and patent trial practice. Some students deepen their concentration in a particular substantive area by taking advantage of classes offered at IU’s Kelley School of Business, or its School of Public and Environmental Affairs. (And, of course, some students choose to pursue a four-year course of study by obtaining joint degrees such as the JD-MBA or JD-MPA.)

The role of the third year of law school — and whether it’s necessary at all — will continue to be a topic of discussion for the foreseeable future. While that debate continues, our students are putting their third year to good use in ways tailored to their specific needs and objectives as they plan their careers.•

__________

Hannah L. Buxbaum is Interim Dean and John E. Schiller Chair in Legal Ethics at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law. Opinions expressed are the author’s.

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT