Curricular Reform Revisited

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Vladimir says:

    Thank you, Jon. You’re post is right on the money.

  2. Lawrence Cunningham says:

    Concur entirely.

  3. jon says:

    I’m currently taking the course from Prof. Rubenstein at Harvard, and from what I hear I’m very lucky, because where other CivPro professors present the material dryly, he somehow manages to make it interesting, like you said. It amazes me how many of my classmates love going to CivPro. Never would have guessed. It’s all about the teacher.

  4. Civ Pro King says:

    One para would have done the job:

    Of course, this whole discussion is somewhat unrealistic, just as the comments on my post were unrealistic to imagine that I don’t teach my students rules. It is unrealistic to imagine that anyone is either solely a rule-memorizer or solely a theoretician. A class must include both. As my old civil procedure professor, Harold Koh (now legal adviser to the Department of State), used to say, you have to consider the law on multiple levels — five levels, in his view. You need to have actual clinical practice skills, you need to know the black-letter rules, you need the doctrine and policy that underlie the rules, you need a theoretical and interdisciplinary perspective, and you need a critical perspective. All of these come into play in actual legal practice[.] But theory is an essential part of the picture.

  5. MYarnell says:

    Having practiced commercial litigation for 20 years,been a general jurisdiction state court trial judge for 13 years, and now in the fourth year of teaching first year civil procedue, I agree with Joel Segal’s post. In trying to make the points Joel makes to my civil procedure classes, this year I played the well known and funny video clip “Five Minute University” See