-- AndrewWolstan - 18 Feb 2008

A law school class is not, and should not be, a zero-sum situation. Sharing knowledge and collaborating with one's classmates does not involve the transfer of benefits from one student to another. If I share my outline with my classmate, I do not view that as decreasing my chances of success while simultaneously increasing theirs. By helping others, you are cementing your own knowledge of the material and, thus, increasing your own chances of success. We as law students will benefit the most if we transform law school into a non-zero-sum situation. We should depend on eachother to do the best we can possibly do, to attain the most knowledge we can attain, in order to compete with other law school communities in the long run.

-- MinaNasseri - 18 Feb 2008

How much of what is being done to us, is a product of the school's design, and how much of it is our own doing? We each set our own personal goals, we each decide how much we'll let our grades matter to us, we each decide how much we're willing to collaborate. Maybe the curve is not the issue, but how we each react to it is.

-- OluwafemiMorohunfola - 19 Feb 2008

Perhaps the focus on the classroom and grades is part of the problem. I don't feel like this law school has been doing much to prepare me to be an attorney. As I commented on Amanda's paper, I hear that law school does not train me to be an attorney. I hear that I am supposed to get my training from a law firm. In fact, lots of places will not hire lawyers out of law school because they have not been 'trained' yet. Why is this the case? Why don't we get better practical training? Northeastern's Law School has a co-op program. Its goal is to train lawyers while they are in law school. Perhaps following this type of model could produce a better law school.

-- JustinColannino - 20 Feb 2008

That is an interesting question Justin. Why isn’t law school more “practical”? I don’t know. I think I will respond with another question: should it be? What are we supposed to get out of law school? I already feel like I am in trade school. (this is my law school complaint) I came here straight out of college. As an undergrad, I was a theory hound. Sophomore year I decided college should give me a framework, some analytical tools to help me think about the world around me. The professor throws some theory at me, and I apply it in some 25 page paper at the end of the semester. It’s a wonderful system. I am sort of hoping to get the same out of law school: a law specific tool kit. I am not sure practicums are the way to achieve this goal. The LAW is already a narrow category of study. I, for one, do not know what kind of law I will be practicing, so I do not want my studies narrowed by learning a specific way to study the law.

I hope I haven’t misunderstood your point, Justin. What do you mean by “practical”? What should law schools train us in? Should we have more research courses? Less case study more statutory analysis? Externships? When I hear “practical” I have images of document review and brief after brief, and networking skills workshops (the horror!).

Waiver: This is not to say that I approve of our current curriculum.

-- ThaliaJulme - 20 Feb 2008