Minutes of 2 nd Annual America s Law Dean s Forum Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile June 2013 (June 27th and 28th) Present.

Transcription

1 Minutes of 2 nd Annual America s Law s Forum Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile June 2013 (June 27th and 28th) Present. Milton Estuardo Argueta Pinto Universidad Francisco Marroquín Guatemala Silvia Gloria de Vivio Universidad del Norte Colombia Roberto Guerrero Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Chile Barbara Holden-Smith General Secretary and Treasurer International Association of Law Schools Vice Cornell University Law School United States Mary Kay Kane Emeritus University of California Hastings College of Law United States Robert H. Klonoff Lewis and Clark Law School United States Luis Sergio Parraguez Ruiz Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador Ileana Porras Associate University of Miami School of Law United States Alejandra Ovalle Director of Graduate Affairs Pontificia Universidad Católica Chile Juan Enrique Vargas Viancos Universidad Diego Portales Chile Francis S.L. Wang President International Association of Law Schools Emeritus Kenneth Wang School of Law China 1

2 Welcome- Roberto Guerrero. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Session 1. Who are we? Who do we teach? For what? The IALS has been working, in the regional forums, to set standards, the common principles across the group. The principles must be settled on an international basis. Laws aren't domestic anymore, because of all the international agreements so, how can we make sure that our students can communicate with the ones in any other country? As we get globalized and domestic laws become more harmonized, there must be an attempt to coordinate among law teachers around the world to make sure that their students understand this new dynamic. Additionally, as nearly all nations have embraced the concept of the rule of law, our students need to develop a common language and perspective with their global counterparts so they can effectively represent their specific national and cultural interest through the common language of the law. The European Forum developed some basic paradigms for analyzing legal education. We looked at the education of a law student from three perspectives: skills, values, knowledge. In developing standards or sets of principles, Europe recommended that we first look at an agreed set of principles as to the outcomes we as teachers of the law would expect from anyone who studies the law. Then move on to defining standards for a legal education. The Asia/Pacific Forum came to a unanimous agreement on a draft Statement of Principles of the Outcomes of a Legal Education. The Africa Forum built on the outcomes statement and finalized a draft on a Statement of Principles on the Standards of a Legal Education. Finally, in the Americas Forum we fine tuned both drafts to finalize a set of principles to present to the Global Law s Forum to take place in Singapore in September of What are the next steps? What are our concerns? The participants agree on some challenges; students want to be lawyers of the world, technology changes the dynamic of the class and students act like consumers that feel that a good grade is a right, they don't want to spend their time thinking. We need to bring new approaches to the pedagogy of teaching law. 2

3 There are also some differences; in many countries women are better students, in the US some women are uncomfortable with speaking in class. Also, there is a difference between the schools where law is taught as an undergraduate career and those where it is taught in grad school because the maturity of the students is very different and, in the first case, is harder to teach law in fewer years. Finally, the social difference in the class implies a big gap in the educational background. How are we preparing our students for the world? Some schools are making an effort to internationalize their curriculums, others offer exchange programs. Not all the students are as interested on these initiatives as expected because firms, at least in the US, don't see that as a credential. What percent of your students end up doing law? The answer varies from one country to other but most have a very high rate of students doing law, either in the private or public sector. 3

4 Session 2. Current issues facing Latin America. Do you see a difference between private and public schools? In Guatemala there are too many students in the public institutions, so the quality is lower. The admission is different, is almost free. Private schools can be more selective. Students finance it with loans and a program "Impulso al Talento Académico" focused on people with lower income. It includes monthly maintenance fee, English courses and money for the time of taking the exams. The school affords this, but it is very expensive, so the school can only have 2 or 3 students a year. The school cannot accept public finance because that would compromise our independence. In Colombia there is one central public university without much coverage and many small public schools with low academic level. There are 153 law schools, but not more than 20 good schools. Nine out of the 10 best schools are private. Many would choose a private school because there are no strikes there. In Chile there is a different system. There are the private schools and a group of schools called The traditionals where there are public and some private. These receive finance from the State. PUC receives approximately 20% public finance. In Chile, accreditation is not mandatory for schools, only for the Universities. There isn't much difference in the fee. Now PUC is focused on the more vulnerable sectors, people for whom is very hard to stop working during the years of their career. In the US, tuition is US$46,000 a year in some state institutions. And they are public schools. Berkley is the most expensive and it's public too. It receives 15% from the State but that forces them in many ways. Ecuador: US $9,000 a year, the most expensive in Ecuador. It is 100% private, no public funds. There's a triple evaluation: universities, careers, programs that go to an accreditation council. Among the first 10 universities, only 2 are public and only one of those has a law school. Government has started a campaign to make the public education have at least the same quality of the private and it is creating a mega university called "Ciudad del Conocimiento" and is recruiting professors from private schools with good salaries. That is seen as an attack to the private schools. Also the government has created grants to study abroad masters and Phds. 4

5 Session 3. Current Issues Facing the United States The US standards demand a quite expensive way of legal education. Also it is a graduate education, it is easier considering they come with a background so schools can be more focused and can spend more time in skill training. Most of the curriculum must be taught by full time faculty members, who have to be tenured or at least have the possibility of being tenured. So salaries must be higher, also give the sabbaticals and support research. It allows the academy to be helpful in shaping the law. It is a good thing but it is very expensive. Because of how expensive it is, students think of themselves as consumers and rankings have done a lot to make that happen. Discussions Prof Ovalle states that the soul of the universities has changed, then Prof. Parraguez says that the dichotomy between just training students to be lawyers, without the deep treating of the theory is a false dilemma because universities are for theory thinking but there is also a relationship with the society and should be productive for the society, also it is very risky to be defined by the objectives meant by the state because they are mainly meant by the government and that changes all the time. Prof. De Vivio: Why are rankings, not the tool but objectives themselves. So the schools that aren't in the top try to follow what the top schools do and that doesn't let them do what's needed in the region. Have we lost the way of our own fates? We all teach law, what can we bring? Prof. Ovalle: we don't have in Latam an agency that could do the evaluation. How do you adapt your own values? We all signed on to this system so how do you localize it. It is a system that works so it'll stay and we have to prepare students for international and people making standards aren't thinking on that. Wrap up discussions. There are lots of diversity but also lots of commonality. Prof. Wang introduces the Statements of Principles. 5

6 Session 4. Statement of Outcomes of a Legal Education. The participants discuss the Outcomes of a Legal Education and agree on some changes. (The former Statement in parentheses when a change has been made) 1. Knowledge A law graduate should know and understand: i. The core areas of substantive and procedural law; ii. How laws are created, implemented, and changed; and iii. The contextual underpinnings of the operation of law (both domestically and globally). 2. Skills A law graduate should be proficient in: i. General academic skills, including critical analysis and reasoning; ii. Researching, reading and analyzing legal materials; (reading and analyzing legal materials) iii. Problem solving, planning, strategizing and how to comply with legal requirements; and (Planning, strategizing and complying with legal requirements) iv. Constructing a legal position and effectively communicating orally and in writing within a legal context. (Effectively communicating within a legal context, orally and in writing) 3. Values A law graduate should understand and act in accordance with: i. The professional ethics of the jurisdiction; and (The professional ethics and values of the jurisdiction) ii. The fundamental principles of justice and the rule of law. 6

7 Session 5. Standards Project. The participants discuss the Global Standards for a Legal Education and agree on some changes. (The former Statement in parentheses when a change has been made). 1. Regulation Regulation of legal education and internal law school governance should be: (Regulation of legal education and should be) i. Formulated with law faculty input and be subject to domestic, and where appropriate, international peer review; ii. Objective; iii. Transparent; iv. Verifiable; v. Consistently applied; vi. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms; and vii. Jurisdictionally specific. 2. Students A. Selection of Students It is recognized that admission standards should be based on established local criteria taking into consideration the jurisdiction s public policy as to admission criteria of students into higher education. Student selection should be: i. Objective; ii. Transparent; iii. Verifiable; iv. Consistently applied. v. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms. (New item) B. Evaluation of Students It is recognized that there are a variety of forms of student evaluation which vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, as well as from institution to institution. (The commission agrees on moving this phrase to point 4, Curriculum : It is recognized that there is a growing emphasis on formative rather than purely summative evaluations of student performance.) Student evaluations should be incorporated in an comprehensive legal educational program to enable law graduates to attain the outcomes specified in the Statement of Principles - Outcomes for a Legal Education. 7

8 They should be: i. Objective; ii. Transparent; iii. Verifiable; iv. Consistently applied. v. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms. 3. Faculty It is recognized that local standards, needs and resources should guide the recruitment, evaluation, advancement and retention of law faculty. (The commission agrees on deleting: It is recognized that a balance should be struck between full-time and part-time faculty in the teaching of law.) Local standards should be: i. Objective; ii. Transparent; iii. Verifiable; iv. Consistently applied. v. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms. 4. Curriculum A law curriculum should be: i. In conformity with established local criteria and policies; ii. Comprehensive and flexible; iii. Tied to the Principles of a Global Standard for Outcomes of a Legal Education; iv. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms; and v. Subject to periodic domestic, and, where appropriate, international peer review It is recognized that there are many methodologies in teaching law that may be used to educate their students in the context of local needs and resources. Methods of evaluation should be appropriate to learning objectives of the class. It is recognized that there is a growing emphasis on formative rather that purely summative evaluations of student performance. (From 2.B) 5. Infrastructure Physical, Technological, Informational and Administrative (Infrastructure Physical and Administrative) It is recognized that the physical, technical, as well as the administrative infrastructure of an educational institution are fundamental in achieving the 8

9 Outcomes of a Legal Education. It is also recognized that educational institutions must work within the context of the resources available within their jurisdiction. Infrastructure should be: i. Sufficient and adequate to enable the institution to achieve the Outcomes of a Legal Education; ii. Informed by evolving domestic and international norms; iii. Subject to periodic domestic, and, where appropriate, international peer review. 9

10 Wrap up discussions Prof. Guerrero asks what about IALS taking the opportunity of becoming a sort of certifying entity for schools that meet certain benchmark standards. This is something that the ABA has discarded for the moment and there will be a need for this in the immediate future, as global law schools seek to differentiate. Prof. Wang explains that is an idea that has already been discussed and that, right now, the IALS isn't qualified, since that needs a mechanism and a template and also, is hard to have the same criteria for very different countries. So that may be a next step, after setting principles and values. Prof. De Vivio suggests doing a regional work, sending a questionnaire to a one prestigious university in every country, to understand what each region has in common, to find regional fundamentals. Prof. Porras suggests making the association more exclusive by asking the sponsorship of a member to get a membership. Part of it would be encouraging members to bring more law schools or their areas. Members should subscribe to the principles. 10