In general, I have to come down on Scott's side here. I haven't followed Spence's blog much because the couple times I've looked at it (when all the crimblawgs went ga-ga and started pointing us to it) it's been strange. And not strange in an interesting, I'm going to write poetry now and comment every so often on the law way, but in a self-promoting, cult-creepy way.
As to what Spence says about law school, I can't say that I hold a much higher regard for law school than he does. In fact, here are the two basic phrases I use to describe law school:
1. One year of education crammed into three years.However, I recognize that most people in law school are not headed out to be trial lawyers. Still, I don't think that law school prepares people for other realms of practice either. In fact, I long ago came to the conclusion that the primary thing that law school teaches students is how to be a law professor.
2. Three years of legalized hazing.
The Socratic method is a farce. Teaching via statutes or black letter treatises of common laws and then using case law to demonstrate and argue would make sense. However, having a student read a case, or worse part of a case, so that he can figure out and get quizzed on what compose the actual elements of larceny is just plain asinine.
What else needs to be done to fix law school? That's a series of long posts I don't have the time to undertake right now. Hopefully, the changes which W&L is engaging in will be a beacon to other schools. We'll see.
5 comments:
What Spence is saying echoes what many bloggers are saying. It may be hyperbolic but that's his style -- he is trying to convict law schools. Unless you believe all law schools are perfect it's time for suggestions, not shooting the critic.
If you're going to describe The Great One's post with a word ending in "ic", myopic would be a better word.
It's not too much to ask a lawyer (even a Legendary one) to be a bit more precise in his criticism and his suggested solutions -- especially when he has unlimited space for the discussion and his audience is not confined to the gullible or inexperienced.
This site looks like it is some cult stop.
Nobody cares what Scott Greenfield says, he touts the ugly.
It is fitting, he would be swept into his own cult pit.
User Greenfield's ratonale on cults, his
blog would fit in the category of
cult central.
On Spence and his bashing of law schools,
is this to surmise that those who attend
his programs feel the most defrauded by
their University law school ?
So, which law school wins the award
for the biggest fraudster, perhaps in
view of Norm Pattis fits of pain in his
30 pieces on the matter, the University of
Conn law school is fraudster Numero Uno,
per the Spence barn storming
Did all the Spence pards go through
TLC 101, after U of W, or is an exception
to the Spence fraud claims ?
I some times wonder if Spence does
his fraud routine as a marketing ploy
to get people to go to TLC.
So, cheap shots, to tar and feather
the U S legal education system.
Almost has a Chamber of Commerce
taint to it. How ironic.
Post a Comment