A one-size-fits-all model might not be the best solution
There’s a level of standardization to the 1L curriculum for sure. Everyone starts with Legal Methods, has LRW in first semester, and takes the same core courses. The problem, with those other core classes, is the way they’re scheduled.
We’ve all heard it from a professor at least once: “Did you guys take X class last semester?” The question is met with nods, ‘no’s, and shrugs until the professor finally sighs and says something along the lines of, “It’s so much harder to teach when you don’t all have the same background.”
Legal Process, for example, requires at least a rudimentary understanding of a number of classes, including criminal and constitutional law. I was one of a lucky bunch who had both classes last semester; I can’t personally attest to whether or not there is a benefit to it, but I do feel like they gave me a good basis for legal knowledge in general.
Other substantive courses seem to go hand in hand, as well. Torts and contracts, for example, have many similarities, and studying them side by side may be beneficial for the understanding of both classes.
However, we run into a logistical problem pretty quickly when trying to ensure every student takes the same classes in first and second semester. Would that result in larger lectures, or in more offerings of the same subject?
The other problem is our small groups. Personally, my small group has been invaluable to my 1L experience; it’s how I made the majority of my friends, a chance to really get to know a professor, have a mentor-mentee relationship, and an opportunity to take a more detailed look at certain cases. I would not trade small groups for anything; I think there’s something so important about them. Many other students have expressed similar sentiments about their own small groups—losing them would be a small tragedy. So how do we continue with the small group model, while still standardizing the curriculum?
The easy answer would be to have every small group study the same subject. But then the question becomes, which subject do we choose? Is there one subject, over all others, which should be looked at for the entire year, rather than just one semester?
My instincts would say Legal Process. It makes sense—exploring the subject in a small group setting means you could then bring in other disciplines. But that doesn’t necessarily work either, given that Legal Process is weighted less than the core subjects, and making it a small group class would give it the most weight. So then what? We choose one of the core subjects and make that the small group subject for every 1L? It doesn’t make sense from a scheduling or a staffing standpoint.
So, unfortunately, while the current system leads to holes in learning, confusion amongst students, and frustration for professors, there doesn’t seem to be a workable alternative right now. The only solace for current 1Ls is that by second year, at least we’ll all have taken the same classes, and hopefully have learned the same important concepts… right?
