Feb 6, 2023·edited Feb 6, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett
Law is a practical profession needed for wider society to function. It deals in reality, not dreams. If law schools disappear up their own arse we’ll finish up going back to Bar Exams and the Inns of Court system. And that will kill all the theory dead, actually, as a basic side effect.
Thanks so much for this important piece, Katy. You have articulated the issues beautifully.
The topic has real resonance for me as someone who was a construction lawyer for several years before going into academia full time 18 years ago (but being lucky enough to maintain a day a week consulting to Clayton Utz throughout that time).
The key, I think, has to be how we in the academy support colleagues who have an interest in giving back to the profession and the academy through teaching. As has been noted by many, we have a wealth of talent and goodwill across the legal and other professions. The question remains how best we and other law schools can harness and support that in a way which is compatible with individuals' own capacity to contribute and the inevitability that faculty resources are limited. As you allude to, Katy, this is not a new question and the answer to it needs to be dynamic.
I believe, from my experience as a former student, and more recently teacher and course director, that the way in which programs like the Melbourne Law Masters operate provides a model for harnessing this capacity - not just in private law but across the range of law teaching. Every year, hundreds of practitioners are integrated into our teaching program as subject lecturers or guest lecturers, and the contribution they make is invaluable.
Of course, this contribution relies on extraordinary goodwill and dedication, from our teachers and from the academy (especially our professional staff colleagues), but my experience confirms that we have a wonderfully deep well from which to draw. I daresay my construction law colleagues at other universities around the world would say similar things - our teaching and research in this area has a symbiotic relationship with practice in the industry and its law.
I want to acknowledge with gratitude how I have myself been a great beneficiary of support from my colleagues in the academy and the professions as I have forged my career in a private law related area (though, construction law spans many other areas too). And, I remain optimistic that we will continue to have a thriving faculty of private law teachers - indeed, I have the great pleasure at Oxford this week of working with private law scholars from around the world this week on a Symposium on the interface between building safety and private law. So, if I can provide any support or advice to colleagues thinking of getting involved in teaching in some way, I would be delighted to do so.
This is a fabulous post!!! My intuition is that their is a dearth of scholarship/PhDs in private law not solely because market incentives are higher in private law careers but also because the current dominant view is that public law directly effects people and consequently it is able to inflame human passions for "social change". The view that land law does not have as much of an impact on public discourse is reflection of how law, as a discipline, exists/works in silos. Unless, we can change that - we have a problem, Houston!
Agreed. And the vast majority of JD students don’t give a fig about those PhDs or the scholarship more generally. This is not to malign either scholarship or JD students, but to point out that theirs is a different mission. We do need to resist pure credentialism, and there is an important link between teaching and scholarship. I one co-taught a land law unit with a barrister who told me it was a waste of time to teach general law principles in a Torrens system - an extreme (and incorrect) view, but it illustrates the importance of scholarship (or at least of careful thought about what we teach). It doesn’t take aPhD to work that out though.
Law is a practical profession needed for wider society to function. It deals in reality, not dreams. If law schools disappear up their own arse we’ll finish up going back to Bar Exams and the Inns of Court system. And that will kill all the theory dead, actually, as a basic side effect.
great stuff!
Thanks so much for this important piece, Katy. You have articulated the issues beautifully.
The topic has real resonance for me as someone who was a construction lawyer for several years before going into academia full time 18 years ago (but being lucky enough to maintain a day a week consulting to Clayton Utz throughout that time).
The key, I think, has to be how we in the academy support colleagues who have an interest in giving back to the profession and the academy through teaching. As has been noted by many, we have a wealth of talent and goodwill across the legal and other professions. The question remains how best we and other law schools can harness and support that in a way which is compatible with individuals' own capacity to contribute and the inevitability that faculty resources are limited. As you allude to, Katy, this is not a new question and the answer to it needs to be dynamic.
I believe, from my experience as a former student, and more recently teacher and course director, that the way in which programs like the Melbourne Law Masters operate provides a model for harnessing this capacity - not just in private law but across the range of law teaching. Every year, hundreds of practitioners are integrated into our teaching program as subject lecturers or guest lecturers, and the contribution they make is invaluable.
Of course, this contribution relies on extraordinary goodwill and dedication, from our teachers and from the academy (especially our professional staff colleagues), but my experience confirms that we have a wonderfully deep well from which to draw. I daresay my construction law colleagues at other universities around the world would say similar things - our teaching and research in this area has a symbiotic relationship with practice in the industry and its law.
I want to acknowledge with gratitude how I have myself been a great beneficiary of support from my colleagues in the academy and the professions as I have forged my career in a private law related area (though, construction law spans many other areas too). And, I remain optimistic that we will continue to have a thriving faculty of private law teachers - indeed, I have the great pleasure at Oxford this week of working with private law scholars from around the world this week on a Symposium on the interface between building safety and private law. So, if I can provide any support or advice to colleagues thinking of getting involved in teaching in some way, I would be delighted to do so.
Matthew Bell
This is a fabulous post!!! My intuition is that their is a dearth of scholarship/PhDs in private law not solely because market incentives are higher in private law careers but also because the current dominant view is that public law directly effects people and consequently it is able to inflame human passions for "social change". The view that land law does not have as much of an impact on public discourse is reflection of how law, as a discipline, exists/works in silos. Unless, we can change that - we have a problem, Houston!
Agreed. And the vast majority of JD students don’t give a fig about those PhDs or the scholarship more generally. This is not to malign either scholarship or JD students, but to point out that theirs is a different mission. We do need to resist pure credentialism, and there is an important link between teaching and scholarship. I one co-taught a land law unit with a barrister who told me it was a waste of time to teach general law principles in a Torrens system - an extreme (and incorrect) view, but it illustrates the importance of scholarship (or at least of careful thought about what we teach). It doesn’t take aPhD to work that out though.