This article examines the judicial misconceptions held with respect to student legal clinics and student attorneys. It explores how clinicians should inform judicial decision-makers about clinical legal education methods and objectives. Law clinics should be proactive in educating the judiciary about the historical evolution, goals, and distinctive attributes of clinical pedagogy. A failure to do so will have a negative impact on clients and students. Therefore, supervisors should engage in intentional efforts both within and outside of the formal case setting to provide judges with direct messages about the merits and methods of clinical education. Clinicians can educate judges outside of the case setting by bringing judges into law clinic classrooms, conducting judicial continuing education seminars, and making broad efforts to inform the law school and legal community about clinics and their work.
The article concludes by suggesting that law clinics must pursue targeted engagement of judges to enrich the quality of legal education and enhance the value of clinical learning opportunities. It is important for supervisors to treat students as advocates. At proceedings, supervisors can introduce students who are present and explain that the student will be serving as the lead advocate.
Margaret Moore Jackson & Daniel M Schaffzin, “Preaching to the Trier: Why Judicial Understanding of Law School Clinics is Essential to Continued Progress in Legal Education” (2011) 17:2 Clinical L Rev 515.
Leave a Reply