Search News


Browse Archives

News

Writing Lags in Law Schools

January 7, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Law schools have to be responsive to the ever-changing legal world to keep their curriculums relevant and meaningful, but the latest findings of a national survey suggest that they should also be focusing more on the basics. The 2008 annual results of the Law School Survey of Student Engagement, released today, show nearly half of all law school students reporting that their education does not “contribute substantially” to their ability to “apply legal writing skills” in the real world.

LSSSE, first introduced in 2003, is an annual report providing comparative data on self-reported student experiences at law schools in the United States and Canada. In its purpose, it is similar to the National Survey of Student Engagement, another product of the Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. LSSSE aims to provide comparable data to law schools in an effort to help them improve their education and student success.

As of June 2008, the American Bar Association recognized 200 accredited law schools in the United States. This year, 85 institutions participated in LSSSE -- 15 of which are Canadian -- though 148 different institutions have participated over the life of the survey. Notably, three for-profit law schools participated this year. Two of them, the Phoenix School of Law and the Charlotte School of Law, are currently provisionally approved by the ABA.

As with NSSE, LSSSE results for individual institutions are kept confidential, although the survey’s officials encourage institutions to share as much as they are willing. Participating law schools receive their scores, in addition to comparisons with the national average, schools of a similar affiliation and the aggregated scores of self-selected peer groups.

Unlike NSSE, however, LSSSE has no individual benchmarks for engagement, such as “level of academic challenge” or “student-faculty interaction,” in which multiple questions are grouped and institutions receive blanket scores. Instead, LSSSE results are provided raw, by individual question, to participating institutions and can be sorted by any number of variables, such as gender or LSAT score.

Though the core of the LSSSE questionnaire has remained the same since its inception, two experimental question sets were added this year, focusing on computer use in the classroom and legal writing. Students responding to the latter questions provided some surprising data in this year’s results. Some law schools, the survey’s director suggested, should take notice and not forget the basics.

“Despite near universal agreement on the value of these skills and competencies, legal writing, for example, is typically featured primarily in the first year, and viewed by students as a sidebar in their doctrinal classes,” writes George D. Kuh, LSSSE director and professor at the Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, in his introduction to the 2008 results. “The low value placed on writing is symbolized by the facts that relatively few legal writing faculty are tenured or in a tenure-eligible role and are often paid less than other faculty members. Nevertheless, good lawyers must be good legal writers; it is a skill that will serve students well as they transition to the practice of law.”

Although law students report that they have plenty of opportunities to hone their legal writing skills in school, more than a third of them “wished there were more opportunities to do practice-based legal writing during their studies.” Furthermore, only 36 percent of students agree that their legal writing coursework helped them “learn substantive law by providing an opportunity to work through concepts and ideas."

These “disappointing findings,” as the survey calls them, come despite the fact that 72 percent of students report that their writing assignments “frequently require them to integrate ideas and information from various sources” and that 75 percent of students report that they feel their law school “contributes substantially to writing clearly and effectively.” Survey officials, however, say these findings regarding legal writing do not necessarily conflict with one another.

“It’s one thing to write clearly and effectively, and it’s another to feel that you’re learning skills to practice law,” said Lindsay Watkins, LSSSE project manager. “These students are getting good training but feel they are not learning practical writing skills. They would like more opportunities to apply their skills.”

The survey notes that first-year law students spend more time writing memorandums of law and appellate briefs, while third-year law students spend more time writing motions, transactional documents and research papers. Eighty-five percent of students write at least one “medium length paper during the academic year,” and 70 percent write at least one paper of at least 20 pages. Only sixty-two percent “frequently prepare multiple drafts of papers or assignments.” The survey finds that, in general, those students who write more often are more likely to report stronger legal research skills than others.

Among other “disappointing findings,” 60 percent of students report that their school places a “substantial emphasis on memorizing facts, ideas, or methods to repeat them in pretty much the same form." Watkins said this figure has remained relatively static since the inception of the survey, noting that she believes this still will “raise flags” for law school educators.

Elsewhere in the survey, there are multiple suggestions that third-year law students are less engaged in certain areas than are first- and second-year students. For example, 25 percent of third-year law students reported that they “frequently come to class unprepared.” It also finds, via the experimental questions about in-class computer use, that third-year law students are “less likely to use laptops for educationally purposeful activities.” The survey adds that, instead of accessing self-prepared case briefs or taking extra notes, third-year students are more likely “to use laptops to e-mail, surf the Web, and instant message.”

“Some faculty worry that such devices are a distraction, especially among the Millennial student cohort … who typically are much less likely to participate in class and who also spend less time reading and preparing for class than older students,” Kuh writes, but notes there is a bright spot.

Students who frequently use their computers for class purposes -- defined by LSSSE as “taking notes, refreshing one’s memory by reviewing notes from past lectures, reading a case brief that the student previously prepared or accessing LexisNexis or Westlaw” -- report they come to class better prepared and contribute more often to class discussions than those who do not.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Writing Lags in Law Schools

  • OMG! Larry's going to be busy today ..
  • Posted by L.L. on January 7, 2009 at 8:25am EST
  • To relate to "the real world" -- wouldn't that assume recent engagement in "the real world?"

    Nah. A year of front-line experience, twenty years ago, is "real" -- right?

    Yup, yup, yup.

  • Posted by Ethan Burger , Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University on January 7, 2009 at 10:51am EST
  • Greetings:

    The problem in a nutshell is that many law schools do not prepare its students to practice law. This situation often exists for a variety of reasons:

    (i) the grades in most law school courses are determined by getting good "marks" for issue spotting on "Blue Book" exams rather than researching and writing term papers, memos or briefs;

    (ii) many (but not all) law schools hire junior, non-tenure track faculty to teach this courses, a message clearly understood by the students. Such faculty may be able to write "scholarly" law review articles with a multitude of footnotes, but often do not have experience writing memos or letters acceptable to clients at a reasonable cost; and

    (iii) legal clinics are not mandatory for all law school students (notable progress has been made in this area over the last 10 years).

    The above issues are discussed in great detail in Legal Education and Professional Development - An Educational Continuum, Report of The Task Force on Law Schools and the Profession: Narrowing the Gap, 1992 A.B.A. Sec. of Legal Educ. & Admissions to the Bar 233-60, 330-34 (Robert MacCrate ed.) (finding that law schools are not teaching students in an effective manner so that they will be competent and ethical practitioners). Excerpts of this report are available at http://www.abanet.org/legaled/publications/onlinepubs/maccrate.html (last visited January 8, 2009). See also Harry T. Edwards, The Growing Disjunction Between Legal Education and the Legal Profession, 91 Mich. L. Rev. 34, 34-48 (1992) (criticizing law schools for being too elite and impractical and calling on them to reduce the disjuncture between legal education and the legal profession by concentrating their efforts on preparing students for practicing law); J. R. Evered, Arming the Graduate for Professional Battle: No Place for the Weak Skilled: Teaching and Assessing a Course to Develop Multi-Functioning Lawyers, 43 Brandeis L. J. 325, 343-44 (2005) (noting that an ABA Task Force study indicated that less than a third of law students possess the full range of skills needed for legal practice). A majority of law school graduates had four or fewer skills "experiences" (simulated skills, clinics, externships or others), and when selected courses were removed from the list, the majority of graduating students had only one (thirty-two percent) or no (twenty-eight percent) additional exposure to professional skills instruction. These data are consistent with findings that clinical programs are generally taken by only thirty percent of law students where live client clinics are offered. Id.; see also Donald J. Dunn, Why Legal Research Skills Declined, or When Two Rights Make a Wrong, 85 Law Libr. J. 49, 52 (1993) (contending that an increased emphasis on legal writing and the use of computer-based databases such as Lexis and Westlaw have contributed to a de-emphasis on teaching conventional legal research skills); Arturo Lopez Torres, MacCrate Goes to Law School: An Annotated Bibliography of Methods for Teaching Lawyering Skills in the Classroom, 77 Neb. L. Rev. 132, 138-99 (1998) (presenting examples of offerings indicating how many law schools have changed their curricula in order to strengthen the "lawyering skills" component of legal education).

    I note that this issue is not a new one. I would recommend that persons genuinely interested in this topic read: Ethan S. Burger, Esq. & Douglas R. Richmond, Esq., The Future of Law School Faculty Hiring in Light of Smith v. City of Jackson, 13 Va. J. Soc. Pol'y & L. 1 (2005). The reluctance of many law schools to hire practitioners for full-time faculty positions at the entry level is a large part of the problem.

  • Writing Lags in Law Schools
  • Posted by Ida Kotyuk on January 7, 2009 at 11:05am EST
  • Lucky to have experienced an “on again – off again” 20-year relationship with a large international law firm as a “typist” to supplement my own “on again – off again” income; I have seen a number of changes as to how attorneys write. First, in the olden days before computers, attorneys developed the talent to write succinctly; that is, they committed and finalized their thoughts before dictating. They may have changed a word or two afterwards, but no more than a word or two.

    Second, with the advent of computers, I came to see pages and pages of words without a single verb; or a direct object. Why focus when you can edit? Today these documents as ticking time bombs.

    Thirdly, what’s with the passive voice. Hugely run-on sentences because the object was being acted on. There seemed to be a shyness to committing oneself in legal terms.

    Mind you, I loved the people I worked with, respected, and learned from. But, yes, the ability to write well and clearly seems to have fallen off the requirement of graduating law students.

  • Writing skills
  • Posted by Ellen Lee , EdD at Retired on January 7, 2009 at 11:41am EST
  • I am appalled by students' poor writing skills, period. Isn't grammar taught any more? Don't law schools focus on grammar as a base for legal writing? Even Barack Obama, an articulate speaker as well as a lawyer, doesn't know any better than to use a subjective pronoun when an objective pronoun is correct - and he makes that error repeatedly. Although I heartily supported his campaign and am delighted that he was elected, I cringe every time I hear him say "I" when "me" is correct.

  • Posted by Thoms Crowell , Adjunct Prof. of Film Law at School of Visual Arts on January 7, 2009 at 1:05pm EST
  • I couldn't agree more with the article and Prof. Burger’s comments.

    I went to a prominent New York law school after several years as a journalist. However, I was told by my legal writing teacher, in no uncertain terms, that my "bad journalist’s habit” of using both introductory sentences to lead into a topic and concluding sentences, to remind the reader of the relevant to the point I just made, was not appropriate for legal writing. Rather, I was to just state the facts, and not to introduce them. Anything else was “patronizing to the reader.”

    When I became a lawyer and began to practice -- no surprise -- I found that the opposite was the case. Of course we lawyers have stylistic conventions that we must adhere to, however, good persuasive writing must always entail a sense of language, structure, and the ability to gently guide the reader to the point that we wish to make. Law schools need to view their legal writing programs as core components to a legal education, rather than a footnote to an already overburdened first year program.

    There's also a larger point to be made about law school’s aversion to teaching practical skills. Those of us who have graduated from American law schools have undoubtedly all heard variations on the phrase “a law school is not a vocational school.”

    Those classmates of mine that did not have the benefit of landing in big firms after graduation were unanimous in their disgust at how very few real world skills they had after they passed the bar. Law school clinics are an excellent way to bridge this gap, and need to be a core requirement for law students seeking to actually gain practical knowledge as quid pro quo for their mountains of student loan debt.

  • "Schocking" news
  • Posted by Andrej Starkis , Assistant Progessor of Law at Massachusetts School of Law on January 7, 2009 at 2:56pm EST
  • Fear not. There is hope. ABA schools are (somewhat gradually) moving toward professionalizing the teaching of legal writing and, more belatedly, recognizing the value of the faculty who do this work.

    My thought: why wait? After some 18 years of practice, I began teaching at a little upstart law school the ABA was then (as now) declining to recognize. All the faculty were practicing lawyers and judges, and the focus was on practical legal skills. Four semesters (11 credit hours) of required writing courses, and probably more total required courses than any other law school.

    The students I've had in my (required, though not with me) pre-trial civil litigation practice courses leave this law school ready to hang a shingle, if that's what they decide to do.

    In part because our lack of the ABA's Good-Housekeeping seal -- though we are fully accredited by the same regional accreditor that approves other little places like Harvard University and M.I.T. -- we get a good number of students whose writing skills need some extra work. But we don't just moan about it (though there is admittedly some of that); we do something about it. And despite having a large number of students other schools would not have considered (we don't even require an LSAT, or look at it if there is one)our students pass the Massachusetts bar on the first try at a rate about 80% of all Massachusetts law school students, and about 90% of our graduates over 20 years who have continued to take the bar beyond one or two tries have passed it.

    The reference to the MacCrate Report amused me. Some 10 years ago, I and several of my colleagues wrote an article for the Journal of Legal Education, "Meeting the MacCrate Objectives (Affordably): Massachusetts School of Law," 48 J. Legal Edu. 229 (1998). In it we described what we do and why the ABA -- which is now moving slowly in our direction -- didn't like it.

    Have a nice day.

  • Posted by Larry on January 8, 2009 at 10:15am EST
  • LL, you caught me on a day that I was traveling. This is what I have to say: teaching legal writing is not easy. It doesn't help that for the most part, schools have given up on it, and have adjuncts or worse doing the legal writing teaching.

    It is very easy to bash students. In fact, most professor blogs I read do this. As does Professor Lee. Of course, usually these same people are the ones that have other problems.

    Mr. Crowell raises an intresting point: that there must be a “sense” of the language. Of course, this isn't easily taught and the fact that law schools don't formally study (i.e. generate scholarly works) on this issue isn't helping matters.

    Most of the story recites familiar cliches about law school: that 3Ls are uninspired (sometimes true, sometimes not), and that exams are about memorization (not usually true, but many students don't understand this).

    Professor Burger, It might surprise you to learn that many lawyers need to think fast. Many legal decisions are not made with the luxuries that an “assistant attorney general for X” or a professor has. They are made in minutes. Or less. In that respect, he bluebook format is remarkably realistic.

    I am not sure why legal clinics should be mandatory. Not every law student wants to “practice” in the areas that are relevant to clinics. Moreover, not all clinics good. Since the number of clinics has expanded, many clinics seem downright flaky and nobody has any way of knowing whether they do any good or not.

    Ms. Kotyuk, Although many people think it is a bad idea to engage non-lawyers on this, you need to understand a few things. First of all, in years past, lawyers probably gravitated to legalese more, not because they liked it, but because they had forms that couldn't be easily copied that they thought worked. The passive voice is a VERY important tool for lawyers. A good lawyer knows how to use it to marginalize arguments or to play mind games with the reader. Whatever the case, you should go to law school.

  • Posted by Patrick , Teacher on January 11, 2009 at 6:10am EST
  • I'm not sure students are the best sources to judge how well their legal educations allow them to apply writing skills in the real world. How about waiting until after they actually have to apply those skills?

  • Posted by Larry on January 13, 2009 at 11:30am EST
  • Patrick, It is a difficult issue, since it is hard to determine what "good" writing is. Lawyers write in different styles, often times trying to be hard for some people to understand, to obtain certain results.

    Some lawyers that I consider to be very good don't write at all.

    This is part of the reason law schools don't really care that much about writing.

  • Posted by Virginia Adams Marentette at American Constitution Society on January 21, 2009 at 1:50pm EST
  • It is disheartening to read that law students aren't receiving enough practice based writing opportunities, but there is an available resource to help alleviate this problem: ACS ResearchLink. ACS ResearchLink is an innovative tool for law students to find timely legal research topics and work directly with a public interest practitioner. Students get the benefit of doing legal research that really makes a difference and public interest lawyers can get much needed research done with the confidence that the work is being supervised by a professor. Students, professors & public interest lawyers can learn more at http://researchlink.acslaw.org or I can be contacted directly at vmarentette@acslaw.org.