Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Three models of legal education and a plea for differentiation

  • Article
  • Published:
China-EU Law Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many parts of the world there is a continuing discussion about the best possible law curriculum and teaching method. Each of these discussions is shaped by the specificities of the country in question. This contribution aims to generalise from these national debates and identify three main driving forces behind them. The three main drivers identified here are the requirements that the university poses for any type of academic study, the demands of legal practice, and the expectations that society has of the legal profession. These three factors can be balanced in different ways. This is why a much needed differentiation among different types of law schools or law programmes is proposed. Law schools of the future should be much more conscious of the aims they want to achieve and make well-reasoned choices for one type of legal education or the other. The three models discussed in this contribution are Law as Doctrine, Liberal Law and Legal Engineering.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Rodriguez and Estreicher 2013; see Tamanaha 2012 for a general perspective on the problems of US law schools.

  2. A useful overview is provided by Minzner 2013.

  3. Jamin 2012.

  4. Ahsmann 2012.

  5. See e.g. various contributions to Heringa and Akkermans 2011; Smits 2012; Heringa 2013.

  6. See in particular Susskind 2013a.

  7. From the abundant literature: Nussbaum 2010, Kronman 2007 and Thornton 2004.

  8. Steiner 2013.

  9. In the Netherlands, for example, legislation is prepared that deliberately aims for ‘quality through diversity.’ See Veerman Committee report of 2010 and the bill Kwaliteit in verscheidenheid hoger onderwijs, 18 January 2013, TK 2012-2013, 33519.

  10. Ahsmann 2011.

  11. Edwards 1992; Segal 2011.

  12. See e.g. the discussion between Croze and Jamin 2012.

  13. See Susskind 2008, 2013a.

  14. Susskind 2013b.

  15. See, instead of many others, van Canegem 1987.

  16. See e.g. Vranken 2006.

  17. Atiyah and Summers 1987.

  18. Vranken and Jansen 2002.

  19. See Nussbaum 2003, 1997.

  20. See Morisette 2002.

  21. See Heringa 2010 and Kornet, ‘Future-minded Legal Education in Europe: The European Law School,’ in this special issue.

  22. See in more detail Smits 2011.

  23. Rakoff and Minow 2007.

References

  • Ahsmann M (2011) Het civiel effect biedt niet wat het pretendeert, Nederlands Juristenblad, pp 66–70

  • Ahsmann M (2012) Over meesters in de rechten en priesters van het recht. Boom Juridische uitgevers, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Atiyah PS, Summers RS (1987) Form and substance in Anglo-American law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Croze H, Jamin C (2012) Formation des jurists: dialogue entre cuisinier et gastronome. La Semaine Juridique 36:1551–1554

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards HT (1992) The growing disjunction between legal education and the legal profession. Mich Law Rev 91:34–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heringa AW (2010) European legal education: the Maastricht experience. Penn State Int Law Rev 29:81–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Heringa AW (2013) Legal education. Intersentia, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Heringa AW, Akkermans B (eds) (2011) Educating European lawyers. Intersentia, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamin C (2012) La cuisine du droit. L’École de Droit de Sciences Po: une expérimentation française, Iextenso editions, Paris

  • Kronman AT (2007) Education’s end. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Minzner CF (2013) The rise and fall of Chinese legal education. Fordham Int Law J 36(2):334–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Morisette YM (2002) McGill’s integrated civil and common law program. J Leg Educ 52:12–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum M (1997) Cultivating humanity: a classical defense of reform in liberal education. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum M (2003) Cultivating humanity in legal education. Univ Chic Law Rev 70:265–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum M (2010) Not for profit: why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Rakoff TD, Minow M (2007) A case for another case method. Vanderbilt Law Rev 60:597–607

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez DB, Estreicher S (2013) Make Law Schools Earn a Third Year, New York Times 17 January

  • Segal D (2011) What they don’t teach law students: lawyering, New York Times 19 November 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/business/after-law-school-associates-learn-to-be-lawyers.html?pagewanted=all Accessed 7 Oct 2013

  • Smits JM (2011) European legal education, or: how to prepare students for global citizenship? Law Teach 45:163–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smits JM (2012) The mind and method of the legal academic. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner G (2013) Universitas? Nexus Instituut, Tilburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind R (2008) The end of lawyers? Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind R (2013a) Tomorrow’s lawyers: an introduction to your future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Susskind S (2013b) Tomorrow’s lawyers: access to justice in the online future, The Guardian, 18 January http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/jan/18/tomorrows-lawyers-access-justice-online-richardsusskind. Accessed 7 Oct 2013

  • Tamanaha BZ (2012) Failing law schools. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton M (2004) The idea of the university and the contemporary legal academy. Sydney Law Review 26(4):481–502

    Google Scholar 

  • van Canegem RC (1987) Judges, legislators and professors: chapters in European legal history. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Veerman C (2010) Differentiëren in drievoud (report by advisory committee Veerman, commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Well Being)

  • Vranken JBM (2006) Exploring the Jurist’s Frame of Mind. Kluwer Law International, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Vranken JBM, Jansen CEC (2002) Legal academic training requires teaching law from a comparative perspective. Ars Aequi 51:854–859

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of European Private Law, Faculty of Law, Maastricht University (Maastricht European Private Law Institute), P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Jan M. Smits

Authors
  1. Jan M. Smits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan M. Smits.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smits, J.M. Three models of legal education and a plea for differentiation. China-EU Law J 3, 55–63 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12689-013-0033-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12689-013-0033-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation