Saving the Canary

Abstract

In this Essay, I offer preliminary reflections on two questions. First, given the looming issue of a breakdown in the law school business model, why has it been so difficult for law school administrators and faculties to innovate and stay ahead of the curve? My point here is that the competitive posture of law schools and commendable commitments to academic integrity are much more to blame than concern for self-interest or a general reluctance to change. Second, I will highlight how current fiscal challenges risk blinding us to the even scarier questions involved in keeping legal education relevant in a rapidly changing landscape. The need for contemporary relevance challenges wealthy schools as well, and, although financial pressures vary, even many of the strongest schools have their eye on enrollment and rankings at the expense of true innovation. My emphasis here is that the Socratic method, the focus on appellate cases, and the general focus on “thinking like a lawyer” gave legal education a head start on the Internet age. But a head start doesn’t help much in a marathon, and our charge now is to invent a second, or, depending on one’s attitude toward co-op and clinical education, a third act. We owe our students and the country our best efforts if we are to do our part to ensure that democracy and the rule of law remain the dominant tools of social organization for the twenty-first century.

Keywords: law school, Socratic method