Now that I no longer head a law school, I am free to praise others for their innovations. When you are running an institution of higher education, of course you are expected to promote its ideas. I would like to call out, positively, another independent law school, however, because the issues we face in legal education are structural. We can and should learn from one another, about how to change the very nature of training the next generation of professionals.
I just had the honor of speaking at Mitchell Hamline law school in the Twin Cities. The governing board of the new entity, the result of a merger between the freestanding William Mitchell and its counterpart embedded within Hamline University, invited me to deliver remarks to open their retreat. I have been candid, too much so, in agreeing with critics of American legal education. But I could not be more honest in my praise for Eric Janus, former President and Dean, and his successor, Mark Gordon, and, more politically important, their faculty colleagues for three smart decisions.
The first move was literally a move. One of the competitors in a crowded market, Hamline, packed up and relocated. It was folded into its larger rival across the river. As robust as its home Midwestern metropolis has become, it could not bear four law schools -- including one enjoying state support.
This change benefited students and society by reducing the excess of seats in law school. It improved, moreover, the economies of scale that are crucial for businesses of the size of a typical law school.
The second move was introducing high-quality online curriculum. The school has become the “first mover” by offering a JD in a three year virtual course of study accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA). They had to request a "variance" from the ABA for what is deemed to be a pilot, essentially an experiment. (Other on-line options are not the level of approval by the ABA, the only national authority regulating legal education.)
Although online education is no panacea, as nothing ever is, the evidence shows that works. Well done, it produces outcomes equal to or better than conventional classroom instruction. The advantages are modularity and the freedom it enables. Native American students, for example, an underserved population with compelling reasons to remain home, can prepare for public interest practice without leaving the community they seek to serve.
The third move is not a change but a reaffirmation of culture. William Mitchell was a fine regional school. Its most distinguished alumnus was the late Chief Justice Warren Burger. Graduates of both of the "legacy" schools can be found in the courts and at the most prestigious law firms of the state. Their strength was their teaching. They have made it a priority.
When they reimbursed my travel expenses (my talk was pro bono, and I have no other relationship to Mitchell Hamline lest anyone wonder), I noticed their perfect slogan on the back of their envelope. Their identity is explained: "Great in theory. Even better in practice.”
Any of these features deserves commendation. As a package, they are most impressive. I especially admire the president-deans who were able to bring together scholar-teachers. Perhaps the most demanding challenge for someone in that role is to persuade peers that a paradigm shift is needed; almost all people prefer what they have known, even if it is imperiled.
Mitchell Hamline taking a lead role is to be expected. William Mitchell and Hamline had more reason than most to adapt. William Mitchell was among the fewer than ten percent of law schools that are “independent,” meaning it does not have a parent university to subsidize it during difficult times. Hamline was part of a reputable university, but not one with an enormous endowment. William Mitchell was created through prior combinations. Its predecessors (five of them!) were the type of schools that emphasized access over elitism.
When I was in charge of a stand-alone law school, a senior professor who had joined our ranks from another country said something very reasonable but regrettably mistaken. As we reformed, developing new programs, he remarked to me that we were sure to see a rankings upgrade.
The truth is, however, that conventional measures fail by design to indicate the type of progress Mitchell Hamline is demonstrating for the rest of us. That's why it is imperative for those of us who are able to do so, to point out its success. I wish them well. I’ll be following them; all of us will.