FYI-I've bumped this thread to the top because I'd like to read more comments on the matter (and yes, even the MS comments are entertaining). -RE
A proposal that is working its way through the administration is a mandatory pro bono requirement for all students. I don't know the exact details of the proposal that is being led by Professor MH, but I would assume the requirement is something similar to the practical coursework requirement or the seminar requirement: you must complete X hours of approved pro bono work by the time you graduate.
This probably won't affect anyone who is currently enrolled (settle down kids), but if approved, it will definitely affect all future generations of cu law classes. I don't necessary feel strongly about this issue either way, but I lean more towards supporting this requirement.
Pros: 1) it gets students out in the community and serves as a networking mechanism; 2) it puts CU Law on par with other top schools that have similar requirements; 3) it creates ties between CU Law and local and surrounding communities; 4) it provides students with practical experience and better prepares them for practice; 5) it doesn't involve hours of classroom lecture.
Cons: 1) it hurts students who genuinely have an interest and already participate in pro bono work because these students are no long distinguishable from other students; 2) it forces additional work on students who do not plan on practicing law after they graduate; 3) someone in the faculty needs to manage all of this; 4) the students may need supervising attorneys in order to provide competent services.
This list is far from exhaustive and if anyone can fill us in on the details of the proposal, I'm sure other issues will become self-evident. I think I've identified the low-hanging fruit, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on a possible pro bono requirement.
ps - for you kids out there, that's a picture of Sonny Bono.
41 comments:
I think it's a great idea. And to add to the analysis -- DU requires Pro Bono hours...
The pro bono sounds like a good idea, provided that your pro bono hours do not count toward the practical requirement hours. People already run up against that cap just by doing clinics & externships, so it wouldn't be fair if, because of the cap, students have to do pro bono instead of some other practical thing they're interested in.
I think it's a good idea, but I agree with cfc that it should not count against the practical hours requirement. As an aside--thank you, rice eater, for the interesting posts.
I don't think it should be required. Instead, the law administration should simply allow students to get credit for it w/o counting it against the practice credits (thereby encouraging it). There would obviously need to be a cap on the number of hours you could get. I definitely like the idea of less classroom time and more actual learning out in the "field" but don't think making it mandatory would be a great idea. Besides, lawyering is all about making lots of greenbacks and buying lots of diamonds. . . .
Bling Bling!!
I'm all for community service, but when you MANDATE VOLUNTEERISM it's not volunteerism anymore.
How would this be different from a mandatory clinical requirement? Is "clinic" work different than "pro bono" work?
There's no mandatory "clinical" requirement. The practice requirement that can be satisfied by taking a clinic can also be satisfied by taking a course like trial ad. So yes, this would be different.
To me the biggest problem is that it diminishes the means by which students interested in public interest jobs can distinguish themselves, which is doing volunteer work in the fields they are interested in.
Before the faculty imposes such a requirement on students, I'd be interested in seeing some stats on the number of hours of pro bono work that faculty members do each year.
I also think the school needs to make sure it is in close consultation with the organizations that would be the recipients of all these pro bono hours. It is not the case that they can welcome an unlimited number of student volunteers. Many nonprofit legal organizations are limited in the space available for student volunteers, as well as the staff time available to supervise them. The school should be wary of thrusting a bunch of student volunteers onto groups that are not prepared to utilize their services.
And I think there are important questions to ask about the type of work that would qualify. Helping a firm with a pro bono project they've taken on? Does CU really need to be in the business of providing free labor to help Denver's firms complete projects that are often undertaken as PR for the firm? Shouldn't pro bono in law firms mean that actual attorneys sacrifice billable hours to help the poor, rather than just bring in free student laborers at no cost to the firm?
Yeah, let's make future students do extra work. Sounds good to me.
Hmmmm hadn't thought of that... I'm all for it!!
How are the 1Ls doing by the way, any one freaking out over exams yet... don't worry you'll do fine!
I don't care for the idea, but it would allow a great number of people to benefit from pro bono work who are not currently.
How about a picture of Eric Bono instead?
Nice. I didn't think of that.
Why is Prof. MH leading a charge for mandatory Pro Bono hours when she hasn't done any pro bono herself. I think that it is a BS idea to require it. Maybe giving a special honor to those who complete X amount of hours before they graduate would be more appropriate.
Also, since when are we trying to keep up with DU?
We're trying to keep up with DU ever since they get more jobs in the Colorado legal community than us, even though we are the better school with the higher bar passage rate.
I'm sure that's because of their pro bono requirement too. It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that their school is double our size (and thus have twice as many students looking for jobs in Colorado)...
For those of you who were wondering, "What about Eric? Why pick on Sonny?"
Here he is!
How about Paul David Hewson, also known as Bono.
I think that Anon 4:28 is on to something. I suggest that if CU is going to impose a pro bono requirement, it should impose it on everyone in the law school; that means professors too!
The tobacco survey results are out-- it's probably worth it's own thread.
Enough with the whining about DU getting more jobs. They have more students, thus more alumni, thus more contacts, thus more jobs as attorneys in Denver. That probably won't change unless CU increases its enrollment, and then the effects will not kick in for 10-15 years. It has nothing to do with bar passage rate.
DU Apologist, Anon. 7:02 here. Thanks for repeating what I just said jack ass.
Anon 2:25, what you said to du apologist is just not nice.
You could have written, "I appreciate your support of my position, and it warms my heart that you were able to further elaborate on my position. Let me buy you a cup of coffee Monday. Have a great weekend!"
Think about it next time . . .
DU's better job placement rates are due to a number of factors. Allow me to speculate based on several friends' experiences who went there.
(1) Size and alumni network (I believe that alums can also take classes for free after graduation, if I'm not mistaken).
(2) Networking (they schmooze with lawyers all the time). I think that a pro-bon
(3) Proximity (more legal jobs in Denver and when you're closer it's easier to work 2-3 hours a day during school)
(4) I think they also do a better job of helping place individuals who don't want to do the big firm thing or a clerkship. This seems to be one of CU's perennial weaknesses.
(5) Adjunct professors who teach in Denver (allowing students to forge connections with a practicing attorney in an area in which they are interested).
Maybe a pro bono requirement would help our reputation, but it might also provide exposure to a wide-variety of public interest projects in the area, which would provide good exposure for students and foster networking. Of course, helping others is always good, even if mandated from on high.
Lawyers are generally viewed as a-holes by the community. Maybe a stronger targeting of students by the forces of altruism would result in creating a future where more practicing lawyers understand that part of their duty to society includes donating a little time.
- Your Favorite Crazy Wombat
DU probably also has a bigger career services staff with less turnover.
Hey Wombat,
Why should I go out there an work for free for a bunch of people that think I'm an a-hole? Your speaking in terms of altruism and duty cloud the real issue: You want me to work for free as both an attorney and now as a student.
I have an idea: No free-riders.
Also, you aren't my favorite crazy wombat - I know crazier one that will kick you ass when he finds you.
Hey MS --
Kiss my wombass!
- Your favorite crazy Wombat
Nasty Wombat,
What kind of pro-boner work are you into? I sooner give myself a Cleveland Steamer than get anywhere near your infected ass.
Stamp!
Can we please get off the f***ing topic of DU having better "placement rates" than us? That discussion is so tried and dull and full of conjecture it is ridiculous. On what basis does the ever so expereinced law school student have for this? The number of DU students working in Denver as seen from a summer clerk's desk? Wow! That's crack proof--except for the fact that DU is twice our size and that we just *might* have more grads working in other states.
How about them Broncos?
Is it just me or did this last post look like this:
Lets not talk about X. Blagh, blagh blagh, X, X, X. Blagh, X, X, blagh blagh.
How bout them Broncos?
Just my $0.02: I think that pro bono doesn't sound like that good of an idea. If we have an additional requirement, we should get credit, as in academic credit, for completing it.
Does anyone know what this requirement looks like at other schools? Do students usually get a fair amount of academic credit?
Hey everybody, the Pearl Street Mall now has a strip club! How long will this last?
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/dec/14/strip-club-opens-boulders-pearl-street-mall/
Homer: Awwww...... the Denver Broncos?!?
Marge: I think owning the Denver Broncos is pretty good.
Homer: Yeah, Yeah
Marge: Well, explain why it isn't?
Homer: Ugh, you just don't understand football, Marge.
Here's another two potential problems with the pro bono requirement. (I can't claim to have come up with either of these. A friend of mine pointed this out in conversation.)
Summertime would be a natural time to do the pro bono requirement, yet we have to pay a BIG chunk if we wanna get any credit for summer courses. For example, if you wanna do an externship over the summer, you've gotta pay a big hunk of money for that externship to count towards your graduation credits. It doesn't seem fair to REQUIRE pro bono, and then make students pay extra if they chose to do the pro bono over the summer.
Also, what are people's thoughts on the infrastructure needed to FIND pro bono work? Are there enough non-profits needing law students in the Boulder-Denver area so that students will be able to meet the pro bono requirement? Who would be responsible for finding the pro bono work? The CDO? (Doesn't our understaffed CDO already have enough to handle just finding us jobs?)
On a non pro-bono note...
There is a great new take out place on the NW corner of Folsom and Arapahoe called Tibet Kitchen. I would recommend the mo-mo's!!
Everyone should try it out.
Can we do pro bono and skip the exams?
who is ron paul?
I like pro bono... IN MY PANTS! Thank you, thank you. I will be here all night.
Forced services for no pay... Slavery anyone?
The whole concept, to me, is repulsive. Adding a mandatory pro bono requirement because it's righteous or virtuous, takes both those qualities away from it, and becomes merely an imposition of one person's morality on another.
When choosing a law school, that type of requirement would weigh heavily against my choosing it as a place to study.
Lastly, the fact that DU does or does not do anything, should never be a consideration for us at CU. How about comparing ourselves to a higher standard?
Post a Comment