Stephen Vasciannie
IN LAST week's discussion, I highlighted two different methods used in the teaching of law. I noted that within some American law schools the Socratic Method prevails, while within the English tradition the pronounced tendency is for expositions by lecturers with note-taking in class and restatement in examination.
This is not a caricature of what goes on in most institutions, but the description needs to be refined in certain ways. To begin with, the English lecture tradition is usually linked to tutorials, so that students have the opportunity to give their views on particular issues, and tutors may press students to think about the legal issues to which they have been exposed.
INTENSE
In some English-based institutions, the tutorial system can be quite intense. In Oxford, the undergraduate teaching of law is conducted mainly by tutorials. Students must attend tutorials, but lectures are optional. Indeed, on some occasions, advertised lectures are cancelled because only one or two students turn up by the third week or so of lectures. Students are therefore allowed to vote with their feet when it comes to law lectures at Oxford. Usually, too, lectures at Oxford do not profess to cover the general syllabus; rather, individual specialists in various fields will give lectures on particular topics of interest that actually constitute only a small part of the broader syllabus.
Cambridge places slightly greater emphasis on lectures, and for most law courses you can find a full scheme of lectures during the year. At both places, however, it is assumed that your legal skills are developed mainly in a tutorial group of one, two or at most three students, meeting for one hour per week with an expert in the particular subject. In this tutorial setting, the student cannot hide - if you have not done the work, you will be made to feel embarrassed, and if you consistently fail to do the work, you may well be asked to leave the institution.
One further point may be noted about Oxbridge legal training. The tutorial system is based on the assumption that students must be able to write. This is true of legal training in most, if not all, jurisdictions, but at Oxbridge it is a point that is beyond the reach of compromise. In other words, at Oxbridge, you may have to write one or two essays per week, and each essay must demonstrate proper understanding of the issues. If you write one essay per week, you will almost inevitably develop the writing habit, as you will develop the ability to distinguish important issues from chaff in short order. These are important qualities for a good lawyer.
PHILOSOPHY
But, of course, apart from the question of teaching methods, other considerations must go into the training of lawyers. There should, naturally, be an underlying philosophy concerning the purpose of the legal training. Traditionally, within the Commonwealth Caribbean, the purpose has been clear: legal training must produce legal practitioners. Thus, the Faculty of Law in our system is organically linked to the law school, and the law school is dedicated to the production of practitioners.
In some places, however, the link between legal training and legal practice is not always as direct as it is here. Rather, it is assumed that some people who study the law will follow academic careers, others will use the law as a springboard to other professions such as diplomacy, banking and finance, management, journalism and government. In the Caribbean, to be sure, this pattern of diversification has occurred from time to time, but the teaching of the law is generally directed towards the production of litigators.
WHO?
Another question concerns the selection of persons who may study law. In the United States, law is a postgraduate qualification, so that most who embark upon training for a law degree are at least 20 or 21 years old. Within the English tradition, the average law student is apt to be younger, as he or she will be drawn directly from the ranks of 'A' level students. It is not too easy to generalise about the Caribbean in this regard, for in some years there seems to be a preponderance of post-secondary school leavers, while in others, a large number of law students already have first degrees (often in international relations, history or English).
In the United States, Britain and the Caribbean, the standard for acceptance into legal studies is usually quite high. Certainly, with respect to top American and British institutions, the law students are often among the top 20 per cent of their prior college or high school groups. In the Caribbean, too, competition for placement has traditionally been quite fierce, with the Mona campus of the UWI accepting less than 100 students per year. This, together with other considerations, has opened the way for other institutions to offer law programmes in the Caribbean. Again, this must be a good thing; for legal training, properly carried out, sharpens the mind.
Stephen Vasciannie is a professor at the University of the West Indies and a consultant in the Attorney-General's chambers.
