•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The American Bar Association (ABA) has encouraged the development of field placement programs along with other clinical methodologies. However, the ABA has also responded to the increased prominence of externship programs by increasing the specificity of its accrediting regulations governing the content, teaching, and review of field placement programs. These new requirements, embodied in Interpretation 2 of Accreditation Standard 306(c), are more detailed and specific than the regulations governing other parts of the curriculum, including other clinical offerings. They have been received critically by externship faculty and others. This kind of micromanagement is the very type of intervention that may cause law schools to be generally wary of the way the ABA implements its role as the accrediting body. Perhaps their most fundamental defect, however, is that these specifications of appropriate content and methodology for externships are based on little or no empirical data as to the actual content and methodology of such programs-for almost no data on these issues have been available until now. In this Article we provide such data, based on a survey we conducted on externship programs offered during the 1992-93 school year. We believe this information is of value in and of itself, and our hope is that it can become the basis of a nationwide clearinghouse to help those beginning or evaluating externship programs. In addition, however, we analyze the implications of the statistical findings we report, first in order to understand the pedagogical value of the externship programs now in place at most of the nation's law schools, and second in order to judge the wisdom or lack thereof of the ABA's regulatory approach to these programs.

Publication Title

Clinical Law Review

Volume

2

Issue

2

First Page

413

Download

Share

COinS