Of all the quotes, this is probably my favorite:
[N]o supervising lawyer can begin to approximate the breadth and depth of knowledge of a law school faculty.Indeed. My law school's faculty had at least two professors who may, at one time, have appeared in a courtroom representing a client. Two is more than one, dog. Plus, like, fifteen Supreme Court clerks.
If you or a loved one were found to have cancer, would you want oncologists and surgeons who were educated at top universities and then were trained by experts, or ones who learned medicine entirely through apprenticeships?To be honest with you, I want EVERYONE trained at a top university. Why is my HVAC guy only trained through apprenticeship? My breakfast cafe chef? The foreign people who do my dry cleaning; they've never stepped in a place like UC-Irvine. How are they supposed to appreciate the nuances of fabric and the chemical compositions of the products they use? How is my breakfast chef supposed to think like a chef when he never went to school? How is my HVAC guy supposed to understand the dynamics of air and cooling which are obviously more complex than they were sixty years ago now that we're building with space materials and such? I love answering rhetorical questions with even more aggressive rhetorical questions.
...the reality is that [law schools] do an excellent job of teaching basic skills that all lawyers need to know: how to analyze legal issues, how to read cases and statutes and regulations, how to develop legal arguments, how to do legal research and writing.Why, yes, those four things seem to sum up the entirety of basic skills all lawyers need to know. I am incredibly grateful that under my formal legal education, I learned those four things - and in only three years.
I would keep posting quotes, but I don't want to steal the Dean's thunder while simultaneously serving those among the scamblog crowd who have a sadomasochist streak.