| |
2. Prioritize Quality and develop a Rating System.
We recommend the development of an independent Rating System
based on a set of agreed criteria to assess the standard of all institutions
teaching law as a mechanism to ensure consistent academic quality throughout
the country. The criteria for rating would be evolved by the Standing
Committee for Legal Education while the rating would be done by independent
agencies licensed by IRAHE for the purpose. Recognition could be either
granted or withdrawn on the basis of such ratings. The rating results should
be reviewed annually, regularly updated, monitored and made available in the
public domain.
3. Curriculum Development.
We recommend the development of contemporary curriculum, which
is integrated with other disciplines and also ensures regular feedback from
stakeholders. Autonomy may be granted to universities, national law schools (NLSUs)
and other law schools to decide the core and optional courses to be offered.
This is a departure from current practice where the BCI largely determines
curricula and syllabi. A committee should be formed that includes faculty and
practitioners and seeks student feedback to discuss curricula, syllabi and
reading material of all core and optional courses, and devise a ‘model’
syllabus for all core and optional courses. Law schools and universities would
be free to use and depart from the ‘model’ syllabus..
Law teaching must be interwoven with related contemporary
issues, including international and comparative law perspectives. The
curricula and syllabi must be based in a multidisciplinary body of social
science and scientific knowledge. Curriculum development should include
expanding the domain of optional courses, providing deeper understanding of
professional ethics, modernizing clinic courses, mainstreaming legal aid
programs and developing innovative pedagogic methods.
Legal education must also be socially engaged and sensitize students to
issues of social justice..
4. Examination System.
We recommend revising the prevailing examination systems and
suggest the development of evaluation methods that test critical reasoning by
encouraging essential analytical, writing and communication skills. The
end-semester examination should be problem-oriented, combining theoretical and
problem oriented approaches rather than merely test memory. Project papers,
project and subject viva, along with an end-semester examination to be
considered as pedagogic methods imperative for improving quality.
|
