« Course Preparation and the 800-Pound Gorilla in the Room | Main | To Sympose or Not to Sympose »
Monday, August 14, 2006
A Seemingly Innocent Explanation or Why Can't Labor and Employment Law Just Be on the Bar Exam?
Rant time.
A year never goes by without a law student I like stopping by my office at the beginning of the semester and saying something like: "Hi, Professor Secunda. Wish I had you this semester [OK, so I'm making this part up a little], but I'm only taking classes that will help me pass the bar exam."
This exchange never ceases to get my goat, especially in a state with a 90% bar passage rate. My usual response (at least to those in the top 50%-75% of the class) is that you do not need a 14-week class in Secured Transactions, Family Law, Tax Law, etc., in order to pass the bar. Generally, that is what BarBri is for (of course, I go on to say, if you are otherwise interested in taking any of these courses because you are planning to practice in the area or are intellectually curious, by all means, but don't take it just because it is on the bar).
Actually, there is some joy in Mudville. I believe Pennsylvania just became the first state to include employment discrimination law on their bar exam. Thankfully for most, neither labor law nor ERISA is likely to be tested anytime soon.
Posted by Workplace Prof on August 14, 2006 at 11:40 AM in Life of Law Schools | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef00d834dd441769e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Seemingly Innocent Explanation or Why Can't Labor and Employment Law Just Be on the Bar Exam?:
Comments
There may be some exceptions: Michigan, I believe, at least sometimes tests on workers' comp. But that's a minor and probably unusual thing, and you're certainly right in the big picture. Employment law and employment discrimination are "practical" in that real-world lawyers are much more likely to encounter clients with problems in those areas than in a number of other areas that typical bar exams currently test.
But there's a plus side to this. Students in my labor and employment law classes aren't there because they think they "have to" take the class for the bar. Presumably, they take my classes in many to most cases because they think they actually might be interested in the subject, and/or because they like me or think they might like me as a prof. Now, maybe some students will change those opinions during the semester, and I'm sure some sign up because they want a class that meets at X time on X day to fit their preferred overall schedule. But I'm happy not to have a bunch of students who took my class only because they felt they had to to pass the bar. I always thought that would be the downside of teaching tax, corporations, secured transactions, or other "bar" classes.
Posted by: Joseph Slater | Aug 15, 2006 10:57:20 AM
Paul, I take enormous comfort from your rant. Once a semester I hold a little, private pity party for myself, since I teach mostly international law courses, which most students in Mississippi don't think are practical (despite my strenuous efforts to truthfully convince them otherwise). But here you are, teaching a subject any practicing lawyer should know about, and you have the same problem. Misery loves company.
Or on second thought, perhaps I should sink into deeper depression. If students won't take your courses, why on earth would they take something so seemingly arcane as international law or international trade?
Posted by: Gregory W. Bowman | Aug 14, 2006 10:49:44 PM
I remember that when I was a law student, my fellow classmates frequently made this argument (i.e. it's on the bar) in selecting classes and I always found it rather inane for the reasons you posit here. Why the heck would you pay the exorbitant amount of money charged for a bar review course if you're just going to obsessively duplicate it in your course work - at the expense of other compelling reasons for course selection? For better or for worse, I simply took those course that I felt would be intellectually stimulating. My experience was usually that most practical skills were learned on the job.
********************
Jeff Yates - J.D., Ph.D.
Associate Professor
University of Georgia
Web: http://www.uga.edu/pol-sci/people/yates.htm
SSRN page: http://ssrn.com/author=454290
*********************
Posted by: Jeff Yates | Aug 14, 2006 1:55:00 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.