ArticlePDF Available


This article considers the factors that are likely to continue to shape the future of clinical legal education. Drawing on the history of clinical legal education, both in Australia and more broadly, the article considers how those involved in clinical programs might best promote program sustainability. The article examines the continuing creative tension between goals related to student learning and those related to community service as well as considering the emergence of new forms of clinical lawyering. It recognises the importance of utilising clinical insights across the broader law program and advocates for an emphasis on the natural strengths of clinic-based learning, in terms of students developing effective frameworks for addressing ethical issues and developing strong links with the practising profession. The article also calls for close attention to be paid to developing effective practices in student supervision. Such endeavours can be advanced through developing the awareness of supervisors as to the range of matters that can impact on their work with students, including a better understanding of the supervision practices used in other disciplines. The article also addresses the prospect of an increasing focus on graduate clinical programs, designed to prepare law graduates for their entry to the legal profession. Yes Yes
Jeff Giddings*
This article considers the factors that are likely to continue to
shape the future of clinical legal education. Drawing on the history
of clinical legal education, both in Australia and more broadly, the
article considers how those involved in clinical programs might
best promote program sustainability. The article examines the
continuing creative tension between goals related to student
learning and those related to community service, as well as
considering the emergence of new forms of clinical lawyering. It
recognises the importance of utilising clinical insights across the
broader law program, and advocates for an emphasis on the
natural strengths of clinic-based learning in terms of students
developing effective frameworks for addressing ethical issues and
developing strong links with the practising profession. The article
also calls for close attention to be paid to developing effective
practices in student supervision. Such endeavours can be
advanced through developing the awareness of supervisors
regarding the range of matters that can impact on their work with
students, including a better understanding of the supervision
practices used in other disciplines. The article also addresses the
prospect of an increasing focus on graduate clinical programs
designed to prepare law graduates for their entry to the legal
This article serves as a reference point for the Griffith Law Review symposium
on clinical legal education. It provides an overview of issues that will continue
to shape the development of clinical legal education. It is principally Australian
in focus, while also drawing on relevant history and developments elsewhere. In
order to move forward, those of us interested in clinical legal education need to
reflect on our heritage and plan for the future, in particular identifying how
clinical programs can be made sustainable for the long term. Despite its
importance in maximising the benefits of clinical legal education, little has been
written about what systems and practices might best foster program
Recent publications from the United States,1 Scotland2 and Australia3 have
reinvigorated debates regarding legal education. In the United States in
particular, clinical legal education has been identified as having considerable
* Griffith Law School. Thanks to Helen Kinniburgh, the two referees and my colleague Kieran
Tranter for their comments on an earlier version of this article.
1 Sullivan et al (2007); Stuckey et al (2007).
2 Maharg (2007).
3 Johnstone and Vignaendra (2003).
scope for enlivening and enhancing the education of future generations of
lawyers. The Educating Lawyers report, published in 2007 by the Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, emphasises the particular
contributions clinical experiences should make to the practical and professional
apprenticeships that are integral parts of an effective legal education.4 The Best
Practices for Legal Education report, published in 2007 by the Clinical Legal
Education Association, provides a compelling analysis of the multiple failings
of legal education in the United States, and emphasises the multiple roles that
should be played by experiential legal education.5
The key challenge to greater use of clinical teaching remains its resource-
intensive nature. Multiple strategies can be applied in seeking to effectively
meet the resourcing challenge (in terms of fortifying existing support as well as
accessing new forms), along with making the best use of those resources,
providing valuable learning experiences to as many students as possible. This
will require the development of new partnerships both within and beyond law
schools, as well as the enhancement of our collective understanding of different
clinical methodologies, from simulations and externship arrangements to
various forms of real client experiences. Important issues of how to effectively
integrate and sequence various forms of clinical experience warrant closer
scrutiny if the benefits of such experiences are to be shared effectively and
Clinical Legal Education Across the Globe
Countries including Australia,6 Canada,7 Chile,8 England,9 India,10 South Africa,11
the United States12 and Zimbabwe13 saw the development of clinical programs in
the 1960s and 1970s.14 New law schools with young academics and socially
active students were responsible for much of this development.15 Chile, India,
South Africa and Zimbabwe are examples of nations where community service
imperatives and state expectations about law schools playing a substantial role
in legal service delivery were central to the establishment of the early clinics.16
4 Sullivan et al (2007) esp Chs 2 and 3.
5 Stuckey et al (2007) esp Chs 1, 2 and 5.
6 For example, see Giddings (1999, 2003).
7 Gavigan (1997), p 443.
8 Wilson (2002), p 515.
9 Grimes (1996), pp 137, 139–41.
10 Bloch and Ishar (1990), p 92.
11 McQuoid-Mason (1982).
12 Schrag and Meltsner (1998).
13 McQuoid-Mason (1982), pp 185–88.
14 McQuoid-Mason (1982), Pt 3.
15 Gavigan (1997), pp 7–8.
16 McQuoid-Mason (1982) note 11, Part Three.
Clinics developed in other nations across Eastern Europe, Latin America,
Asia, Africa and the South Pacific through the late 1990s and into the twenty-
first century. While the 1970s were described as the decade of the clinics in the
United States,17 it has been the past 10 years that have seen greater development
of clinical legal education across the globe. Many of the clinical programs
established in developing countries have been supported with resources from
charitable and other foundations based in the United States, including the Ford
Foundation, the Open Society Justice Institute, the Central European and
Eurasian Law Initiative (CEELI) of the American Bar Association and the
Public Interest Law Initiative (PILI) of Columbia Law School. These externally
sponsored programs raise particular sustainability issues. Charitable funding
tends to be available principally for program development and establishment,
with an expectation that local sources will need to provide ongoing resources.
There are also critical cultural issues and resource implications related to the
application of US models of clinical legal education in other jurisdictions.18
In Australia, there has been growing interest in clinical legal education.
The year 2003 saw the commencement of a new clinical program at Deakin
University,19 while 2004 marked the development of programs at the Australian
National University,20 Bond University,21 Macquarie University,22 the University
of Queensland23 and the University of Sydney.24 Several tren ds are evident in
these developments. Law schools are no longer developing clinical programs
through establishing their own clinic site. Rather, clinics are being grafted on to
existing community and government agencies. It is now more than a decade
since La Trobe developed a clinical partnership with Victoria Legal Aid, the
first Australian clinic not involving a community legal centre.25 There has also
been a proliferation of ‘public interest’ clinical courses with such courses now
available at seven law schools.26
17 Condlin (1983), p 604.
18 See, for example, Dowdle (2000–01), p S56.
19 National Pro Bono Resource Centre (NPBRC) (2004), p 18. Deakin operates clinics with
Geelong Community Legal Service and Western Suburbs Community Legal Service, and
identifies community service as a major program aim.
20 NPBRC (2004), p 16. An advice service for young people, run with Legal Aid ACT, Clayton
Utz (a local law firm) and youth advocacy groups.
21 NPBRC (2004), p 17. An administrative law clinic operated with the Queensland Public
Interest Law Clearing House (QPILCH). See Q PILCH (2004).
22 NPBRC (2004), p 22. Macquarie operates clinics with Macquarie Legal Centre and the Public
Interest Advocacy Centre.
23 NPBRC (2004), p 31. A consumer credit clinic run with Clayton Utz (a local law firm) and the
Queensland Public Interest Law Clearing House.
24 NPBRC (2004), pp 31–32. Sydney operates external placement programs and is developing an
‘Amicus Litigation Clinic’.
25 Dickson and Noone (1996), p 845.
26 Griffith University, La Trobe University, Macquarie University, Monash University,
University of Newcastle, University of Sydney and the University of Western Sydney. See
NPBRC (2004).
This broader use of clinical pedagogy in Australian law schools has the
potential to foster further development. Nonetheless, it has been suggested that
‘before clinical legal education will gain a stronger foothold in Australian legal
education, existing programs will need to be rigorously evaluated to
demonstrate the nature and extent of improvements to student learning deriving
from these programs’.27
Specialist clinical programs hav e become increasingly prominent in the 12
years since Monash developed Australia’s first such program.28 There are now
seven clinic options at Griffith Law School, five of a specialist nature. The
University of New South Wales (UNSW) Law School provides six clinical
experiences, with most being based at Kingsford Legal Centre. There are five
clinic options at Newcastle, four at La Trobe and four at Monash.29
This growing interest in clinical teaching in law may overstate the state of
health of the Australian clin ical movement. There is still a lack of what might be
described as ‘clinical fluency’ amongst Australian law schools. The practice-
related experiences of clinical academics tend not to be effectively utilised
across the teaching and research endeavours of law schools. The sustainability
of any clinical program will depend on how effectively its advocates can
anticipate and address concerns, as well as identify opportunities and emphasise
natural strengths. The demands on clinical programs are so diverse and complex
that it will not be possible to satisfy them all, prompting the need to focus on
those dimensions of law teaching and legal research best suited to the use of
clinical methods and insights.
Promoting the Sustainability of Clinical Programs
The Australian clinical movement would benefit from examining how to foster
the sustainability of clinical programs. Sustainability relates to the ability of
something to be sustained or upheld.30 Sustainability recognises the importance
of ongoing development, whereas the notion of maintenance refers more to the
continuation of something that currently exists. Sustainability has become an
increasingly significant concept in relation to the environment, resource
development and the conduct of corporations.31 It is now described as a
‘cornerstone of public sector management’, having the potential to improve the
actual performance of government organisations.32
As relatively small entities, clin ical programs are susceptible to rapid
change on a range of fronts. Such change may relate to staffing, resourcing,
university and law school policy developments or partnerships and cooperative
27 Johnstone and Vignaendra (2003), p 135.
28 Evans (1996).
29 Kingsford Legal Centre (2007).
30 Moore (1999), p 1352.
31 For Australian examples, see Yencken (2001) and Auditor General Victoria (2004).
32 Auditor General Victoria (2004), p 1.
arrangements. The fate of clinical programs is also linked to the future
directions of universities and the legal profession.33
Resourcing issues are often foremost in the thinking of those considering
the use of clinical teaching methods. The service expectations that will
inevitably be linked to external funding need to be balanced with maintaining
the focus on student learning. Providing an intense and productive clinical
experience for students needs to be balanced with making such experiences
available to as many students as possible. This, in turn, needs to be considered
in light of the supervision loads and other teaching, research and professional
responsibilities faced by clinical academics.
A key difficulty for law teaching in Australia, and therefore a factor
limiting the further development of clin ical legal education, is the Relative
Funding Model used by the federal government since 1991 to allocate teaching-
related operating grants to universities. Law was placed in the bottom five
discipline clusters, along with economics, accounting and various humanities
with a weighting of 1. By contrast, the top cluster (comprising medicine,
dentistry and veterinary science) has a weighting of 2.7.34 This all means that,
while HECS payments by law students are at the highest level, government
funding is at the lowest level.35 Cheap ways of teaching remain the default
position for Australian law schools, and this influences the ways in which
supporters of clinical teaching can best advocate to sustain existing programs
and promote the development of new programs.
One way in which thinking on sustainability can be applied to clinics may
be in enabling us to understand the resistance of law school colleagues and the
legal profession to the introduction of clinic teaching. Dunphy and colleagues
refer to a sustainability phase model which is focused on attitudes to change,
especially initial resistance followed by acceptance.36 The later stages of th e
phase model (efficiency, strategic proactivity and the sustaining corporation) are
those most important to the ongoing development of clinics.
Barnhizer refers to there having been four phases in the development of
clinical legal education and methodology in the United States.37 During the
1960s, clinical education initially formed part of ‘an often inchoate assertion of
the need for reform of legal education’. Clinic formed part of a ‘collision of
what was perceived to be radically different values concerning the proper role of
legal education’.38 There was then an experimental phase, with advocates
aggressively asserting that their theory about the special learning effects of
clinical methodology was ‘indisputable fact’. This theory was then tested
33 This analysis has been developed further elsewhere by the author. See Giddings (2005).
34 Goldsmith (2002), p 730.
35 Goldsmith (2002), p 722. Goldsmith notes that, in 1998, the federal government paid
universities less than $7000 per law student while the figure paid for each dentistry and
medicine student exceeded $18 000. See also Johnstone and Vignaendra (2003), pp 3–4;
McCrimmon (2003–04), pp 72–73.
36 Dunphy et al (2003), pp 14–17.
37 Barnhizer (1979), pp 69–70.
38 Barnhizer (1979), pp 69–70.
through the development of a variety of programs with assistance from the
Council on Legal Education for Professional Responsibility.39 The third phase
saw consolidation, reflection and refinement of the experimental findings,
leading to an intensification of the ‘overall understanding of theory, process and
subject matter’.40 The fourth phase involved clarification and assertion of the
proper role of clin ical education in relation to the total curriculum, but ‘with
specific data, concepts and knowledge about how best to achieve legitimate
Barnhizer’s analysis could be applied to the sustainability of individual
clinical programs and is also helpful in the Australian context. Establishment of
clinical programs will be facilitated by recognition of the need for reform of
legal education and a preparedness to look to new methodologies. Sustainability
will require early experimentation, with both existing and new versions of
clinical method, followed by review and consolidation. Then, in order to
maintain a significant position in legal education, clinical methodology and
individual clinical programs will need to have arguments and evidence to
address criticisms as well as the flexibility to respond to changing
In her analysis of the nature of community development, Kenny has
identified a range of key features that may be relevant to clinical programs.
Effective community development generally involves a commitment to
subsidiarity — the idea that ‘power should be devolved to the lowest level
possible, consistent with the effective governance of the affairs in question’.42 It
also involves the establishment of supportive communities, based on developing
and sharing resources and social interaction and participation. Outreach methods
can be used to enable increased participation and overcome isolation.43 These
features suggest the importance of a collegial approach within law schools.
Dunphy and colleagues refer to the practices designed to enhance
sustainability as being linked to the capacity to innovate and escape from rigid
models of operation and production. Reference is made to characteristics
including communicating results readily, facing an accelerating rate of change
and an increasingly complex society. Innovation depends on cultural and
structural characteristics of the organisation.44 This analysis focuses on larg e
organisations, and identifies the need for organisations to be structured so as to
facilitate planning and foster flexibility and creativity. Developing structures to
achieve these apparently conflicting aims appears to be particularly difficult for
large organisations. Clinical programs need to recognise the complex nature of
the environments in which they operate, as part of large and often complex
39 Barnhizer (1979), p 70.
40 Barnhizer (1979), p 70.
41 Barnhizer (1979), p 70.
42 Kenny (1999), p 7.
43 Kenny (1999), p 7.
44 Dunphy et al (2003), p 54.
Dunphy and colleagues identify the importance of clear strategy for
organisations which operate in a turbulent world, an environment that is much
more political, chaotic and disorganised than rational decision-making models
imply.45 Strategy must be articulated clearly and embodied in specific action
plans for every unit and individual. Important capabilities and competencies
include strategic flexibility in adapting to fast-paced environmental change,
strategic leadership, dynamic core competencies, developing human capital,
effective use of new technology, and engaging in valuable strategies including
development of strategic alliances and cooperative strategies.46
This analysis of what fosters sustainability suggests that clinical programs
will benefit from articulating clear program objectives and then going through
the challenging process of prioritising those objectives and adopting a flexible
approach to implementing the prioritised objectives. Such a process will provide
a platform for developing the strategies needed to pursue those objectives.
Learning and Service: The Perpetual Tension
Perhaps the most contentious aspect of clinical legal education involves the
potential for tensions between objectives related to student learning, community
service and the legal professional responsibilities of supervisors.47 These
tensions are simply too important to be ignored. In many respects, they can be
managed creatively but there will be aspects of these objectives that cannot be
reconciled. Clinic teachers need to identify such aspects and then prioritise,
structuring their programs to address those priorities.
Clinical supervision involves an unusual form of legal practice, where
partial responsibility for client work is delegated to the student for the purpose
of student learning. In most legal practices, supervisors delegate work to less
senior lawyers and paralegals because of pressure of business and to maximise
fee-generation.48 Tensions also arise between the interests of clients and those of
students. The legal work required by a client can almost always be done more
quickly and effectively by an experienced lawyer than by a student.
Such concerns are long-standing. In 1972, Allen Redlich wrote of his
experiences in 1969–70 running a ‘relatively large service-oriented clinical
program’ at the University of Wisconsin.49 Redlich illustrated the tensions
highlighted above, suggesting that many problems appeared unique to that type
of placement.50 His most serious criticisms related to the variable nature of
student supervision provided by the lawyers working in the host legal aid office,
45 Dunphy et al (2003), p 170.
46 Dunphy et al (2003), pp 171–2.
47 Gavigan sums up this issue very effectively in her account of the Parkdale Clinic operated by
Osgoode Hall Law School: ‘Put most baldly, the unspeakable question has been: are law
students … learning on the backs of the poor? Put more politely, the question was framed not
infrequently as one of “service vs. education”.’ Gavigan (1997), p 457.
48 See Galanter and Palay (1991).
49 Redlich (1970–71), pp 574, 575.
50 Redlich (1970–71), p 574; see note 4.
which led to ‘many unsatisfactory experiences’. The staff attorneys, ‘although
vigorous and motivated, had no experience and, being unable to supervise,
avoided their responsibilities, leaving it to the student to seek supervision’.51
While some students did excellent work with effective supervision, others ‘came
and went as they wished and abandoned files were common’.52 He further stated
that, while some students ‘enjoyed the freedom to make decisions, give advice,
and, to a high degree, practice law independently, others recognized that the
clients and occasionally they, too, were being imposed upon’.53 These are
serious criticisms from both service and educational perspectives.
Kevin Bell, the solicitor responsible for the La Trobe clinical program from
1981 to 1985 and now a Justice of the Victorian Supreme Court, was driven by
client service concerns in the operation of that clinic. ‘The educational needs of
the students did not figure highly in decisions made about whether a case was
picked up or not. The focus was on the needs of the client, what we could do for
them with the limited resources we had and whether or not a particular case was
worthy of our follow-up or personal attention because it had consequences
beyond the immediate.’54 Bell also noted the complexity for a clinic in balancin g
‘three competing policy priorities’ — casework, community action and legal
The 1987 Report of the Discipline Assessment of Australian Law Schools
expressed doubts about the efficacy of seeking to combine legal education and
legal aid ‘in view of the extremely heavy demands on the office and its very
large practice’.55 In relation to Springvale Legal Service, the key site of the
Monash clinical program, the report stated:
Its primary goal really is the provision of legal services to the
community. We heard criticisms of this in terms of the time an d
supervision which can be devoted to the education of students. Such a
relationship is often not entirely satisfactory.56
While the phrase ‘not entirely satisfactory’ could easily have been applied
to almost all dimensions of Australian legal education in the 1980s, it is notable
that the Monash clinical program subsequently modified the ‘drop-in’ nature of
its clinic sessions, placing a limit of 15 clients per session in the interests of
rationalising supervisor and student workloads.57
Simon Rice discusses this enduring tension in terms of the approach taken
to student supervision. ‘The simple conflict is one between an experiential
approach to learning, in which the teacher encourages a reflective and
51 Redlich (1970–71), 593.
52 Redlich (1970–71), 580.
53 Redlich (1970-71), 589.
54 Kevin Bell, personal interview at Melbourne, 13 September 2002.
55 Kevin Bell, personal interview at Melbourne, 13 September 2002.
56 Pearce et al, (1987), p 126.
57 Greenwood (1994), p 127.
responsible approach to the students, and a directive approach to case
management.’58 While Boon asserts that ‘In conflicts between student’s
educational needs and clients needs, the former must triumph’,59 Grimes
highlights that one of the hardest aspects of clinical work with real clients is
‘turning away a client in need’ .60 Turning away cases is particularly difficult for
many students, as they tend to have limited experience of prioritising different
claims on scarce resources, and often are the ones expected to explain
unwelcome decisions to clients.
Australian clinics continue to view community service as an important
element of their programs. These clinics have been shaped to a significant extent
by the backgrounds of the people working in them. Australian clinical programs
tend to have been, and continue to be, staffed by people with a strong
community legal centre or legal aid background, bringing with them a strong
commitment both to delivering casework services to people who would
otherwise be unable to access legal processes and to using the law and legal
system to achieve community development objectives.61 In several interviews
conducted by the author, many clinicians involved in early Australian programs
have explained that they started their time as student supervisors without having
considered the teaching side of the process in great detail. They tended to be
more concerned with community service and law reform issues.
The federal government has contributed to the community service focus of
Australian clinics through its financial support of clinical courses at Griffith,
Monash, Murdoch and the University of New South Wales. After funds were
provided for a three-year pilot clinical partnership with Murdoch University in
1996, support was extended to cover four clinical programs in 1999 and has
continued since.62 Daryl Williams, the Attorney-General responsible for
providing funds to clinical programs, considered the main purpose of clinical
legal education to be community service, describing the added educational
outcomes as ‘the icing on the cake’.63 Williams referred particularly to the
similarities between clinical programs and community legal centres, and the
ability of clinics to deliver inexpensive legal services to low-income members of
the community.
Australian clinical programs appear to have become mo re effective in
pursuing the potentially conflicting objectives of learning and service. They
have developed their use of a broader range of clinical models and fostered
multi-disciplinary approaches. They have also increasingly emphasised the
importance of clinical experiences in developing the ethical awareness and
community service commitment of law students.
58 Rice (1996), p 14.
59 Boon (2001), cited by Sylvester (2001), p 39.
60 Grimes (1995), p. 182.
61 Giddings (1999), p 38.
62 Giddings (1999), p 54.
63 Daryl Williams, personal interview at Brisbane, 28 June 2 004.
Australian clinic teachers have also developed their understanding of
student learning issues over the past decade. There is now greater acceptance of
the value of clinics that do not provide ongoing casework services. Even with
clinics that include a focus on referring clients to other appropriate services,
concerns have been expressed that for ‘clinical programs [which] receive their
cases from courts, legal aid offices, pubic defenders’ offices, or other indirect
sources, it may not always be possible to get cases at the optimal time for
students’.64 Discussions with clinic teachers, past and present, reveal a
developing understanding of the scope for improving service and law reform
achievements through more effective teaching practices.65 There is also a greater
awareness of the potential for clinic-based learning to b e linked with and
complement the other learning in which law students are involved. Promoting
the integration of clinical insights across the broad sweep of law studies has the
potential to enhance law teaching as well as promoting the sustainability of
clinical programs.
Forms of Clinical Lawyering
Australian clinical programs are now increasingly focused on taking their work
beyond the traditional service delivery model of advice and representation for
individual clients. This is being done principally to enrich student learning and
also to enhance the community service impact of the work of clinic students and
Clinical programs in New South Wales have a particularly impressive
record of running major superior court public interest cases. The clinical
program at the University of Newcastle has undertaken important litigation on
issues regarding police accountability66 in tandem with other mechanisms,
including strategic work with the media, submissions to government and acting
at coronial and other inquiries. The University of New South Wales clinical
program ran a series of High Court anti-discrimination matters in the 1980s,67
and more recently was involved in litigation seeking compensation for members
of the Stolen Generations.68 In an interview, Neil Rees, the Kingsford Legal
Centre Director from 1981 to 1986, who ran the anti-discrimination cases,
questioned the extent of student learning from involvement in such cases: ‘I
don’t think they were particularly great learning experiences for the students
simply because the issues were too sophisticated … I can’t think of one student
who really wrapped their head around the issues. They didn’t have the time.
64 Dinerstein (1991), p 566.
65 These insights come from a ‘roundtable’ discussion conducted on November 20, 1996 at
Clayton with Sue Campbell, Adrian Evans, Ross Hyams, Guy Powles, Neil Rees and Simon
66 See Eastman v The Queen [2000] HCA 29 (25 May 2000); Watterson et al (2002).
67 Giddings (1992), p 263; Giddings (2003), p 14.
68 Williams v The Minister Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 and The State of New South Wales
[2000] NSWCA 255.
They didn’t have the experience. I mean, I can remember the most gifted
students being involved in these cases.’69
Other clinics have adopted community development models with a view to
involving their clients and others in addressing issues of community concern.
Such models utilise non-casework approaches and yet are obviously informed
by the casework conducted by the clinical program and linked community
agencies. Examples of such approaches are those developed at Monash and
Griffith Universities. Adrian Evans refers to the process of community
development identified in the 1970s by the Brazilian educator Paulo Friere and
the need for clinicians to help students and clients to move beyond ‘individual
reflection to group reflection upon the underlying social injustices which
diminish an equitable society’.70 At La Trobe, Liz Curran has emphasised the
importance of involving clinic students in law reform work, as this exposes
them ‘to the broader role they may wish to play in public life when they are
fully fledged lawyers encouraging their participation in th eir law association and
to be unafraid in speaking out against injustice’.71
The Griffith clinical program has involved students working in groups on
community development projects. Given the complex and ongoing nature of
many community concerns, discrete projects are designed in relation to
particular issues which can be completed by successive groups of students, each
building on the work done by previous groups with continuity being provided
by clinic and community legal centre staff acting as project supervisors. Project
areas have included property rights of mobile home park residents and litigation
funding arrangements (particularly ‘no win, no fee’).
Australian law schools and universities now appear to expect more and
more from their clinical programs and clinicians. Clinics are promoted to
students as the best environment in which to develop ‘hands on’ legal skills
while being showcased to the general community as examples of university
commitment to community service and access to justice. Interestingly, there
have been name changes for several Australian clinics, changes clearly designed
to more closely connect these clinics with their law school and university.
Springvale Legal Service has become the Springvale Monash Legal Service and
the Newcastle Legal Centre has become the University of Newcastle Legal
If unrealistic expectations are placed on clinics by universities and law
schools, this will inevitably result in the compromising of some program aims.
The strength of community service expectations is likely to continue to limit the
focus on student learning. To satisfactorily address the underlying tensions,
clinical programs will need to prioritise the various program aims. Further,
where clinic aims have been prioritised, these need to be supported and
resourced by the law school and university.
69 Neil Rees, personal interview at Newcastle, 4 September 1997.
70 Evans (1999).
71 Curran (2004).
72 Giddings (2003), p 21.
Emphasising Ethics, Values and the Public Interest
Closely linked to the tension between community service and student learning is
the issue of the emphasis to be placed by clinical programs on ethics, values and
public-interest issues. Statements have regularly been made as to the capacity of
clinical programs to enhance the commitment of students to professional ideals
and values.73 Evans refers to ‘the dream of every clinical teacher to prove that a
“clinical experience” in law school will re-order the priorities of law students in
favour of public interest lawyering’.74
While limited empirical evidence exists to support assertions regarding
clinical experiences promoting a public interest commitment, it is clearer that
participation in a clinical program makes it more likely that students will deliver
pro bono services through volunteering at a community legal centre. The Keys
Young 1990 survey of students who had completed the clinical program at the
University of New South Wales saw 60 per cent of respondents agree that ‘their
clinical experience influenced them to take or maintain an interest in community
legal centres’.75 This volunteer ethic continues to reinforce the strong
community service focus of clinical programs such as those at Monash and the
University of New South Wales, which benefit from substantial volunteer input,
particularly from practitioners who participated in the clinic during their law
The ethics focus of Australian clinical legal education has been more
clearly articulated in recent years. Styles and Zariski have referred to the
increasing importance of legal education goals related to development of
professional ethics and student-centred learning along with development of
student understanding of the relationship between theory and practice and the
development of technical skills.76 They consider clinics well placed to counter
some of the negative influences of traditional legal education on students’
commitment to the public interest.77 The Best Practices Report has similarly
called for US law schools to expand their use of experiential education as ‘a
powerful tool for forming professional habits and understandings’.78
Judith Dickson and Mary Anne Noone rightly identify that the clinical
setting ‘constantly gives rise to spontaneous and various ethical questions which
challenge and test students’.79 Given that written ethical conduct rules are
'signposts at the crossroads not a fence along the entire length of the highway’,80
clinics provide students with opportunities to develop the ability to identify and
address ethical issues in relation to matters including conflict of interest,
confidentiality and legal professional privilege.
73 See, for example, White (1997), p 606; McCrimmon (2003–04), p 58.
74 Evans (2001a).
75 Styles and Zariski (2001), p 70.
76 Styles and Zariski (2001), p 65.
77 Styles and Zariski (2001).
78 Stuckey et al (2001), p 167.
79 Dickson and Noone (1996).
80 Oatway, cited by Ross (2001), p 45.
Since 1994, La Trobe Law School has included a clinical component in the
ethics subject required for admission to legal practice. This was a significant
development in several respects. The clinic placement is combined with a
seminar series which harnesses the opportunity for students to ‘reflect on the
way a practition er’s duties and ethics are relevant to daily legal practice as well
as on the efficacy of law, the legal system, the legal aid system, the legal
profession and the nature of justice’.81 This was also the first Australian clinical
program to involve students taking responsibility for clients within the practice
of a major statutory legal aid office rather than a community legal centre.
The Murdoch Law School clinical program (known as SCALES — the
Southern Communities Advocacy Law Education Service) emphasises the
importance of involving students in providing legal assistance to asylum
seekers. In 2000, Mary Anne Kenny and Anna Copeland persuasively argued
that such cases are effective in ‘encouraging students to recognise systemic
injustice’.82 These cases ‘have a profound effect on the students as they are faced
with the broader social and political issues that these cases present’.83 The
intensification of the Australian public debate on asylum seeker issues in the
early years of the twenty-first century reinforces their argument. Kenny and
Copeland state that what they ‘hope to achieve as clinical supervisors is to foster
a “rights based” methodology that students will apply across all their legal work.
This involves students gaining an understanding of, and a commitment to,
fundamental human rights as an important principle of any legal practice.84
At Monash, Adrian Evans continues to engage in work seeking to more
clearly articulate the links between community development processes and the
development of values in law students. Evans has written of the need for clinical
supervisors to stimulate respectful argument amongst their students in relation
to competing moral viewpoints identified through the process of community
development.85 He has also been involved in major projects designed to
determine the values which appear to ch aracterise the mass of Australian
lawyers in their early careers.86 Such work demonstrates the potential for linking
the teaching and research dimensions of clinic-based work.
It is clear that clinics are naturally well placed to promote student learning
related to ethics and values. Advocates for clinical programs can emphasise this
natural advantage in terms of students encountering the ethical dimensions of
practice through clinic-based work with clients, as well as seeing such ethics-
related insights permeate student learning across law programs.
81 Noone and Dickson (2002), p 137.
82 Kenny and Copeland (2000).
83 Kenny and Copeland (2000), p 253.
84 Kenny and Copeland (2000).
85 Evans (1999), p 181.
86 See Evans (1998, 2001b); Evans and Palermo (2006).
Clinic and Pro Bono
The past decade has seen increasing Australian government interest in the
development of pro bono legal services. A National Pro Bono Law Conference
was held in mid-2000, organised at the initiative of then federal Attorney-
General Daryl Williams.87 In 2001, the National Pro Bono Task Force reported
to the Attorney-General, emphasising the importance of clinical experiences in
enabling all law students to enhance their appreciation of ethical standards and
professional responsibility.88 The 2001 federal budget allocated funds for the
establishment of a National Pro Bono Resource Centre, which was established
in 2002.89 Subsequent national conferences have been held in 2003 and 2006.90
The work of the centre continues to include a strong focus on promoting pro
bono and voluntary service opportunities to law students.
The development of more formalised pro bono contributions has raised
issues of the appropriate links between clinical programs and pro bono. Clinics
are an obvious link between the academy and the practising profession, and can
consolidate their place within law schools through the development of effective
professional alliances. McCrimmon correctly identifies that, while clinic and pro
bono are similar, they are not synonymous and may be concerned with different
objectives.91 Nonetheless, clinical pedagogy — with its emphasis on critique and
reflection — is considered by McCrimmon as capable of instilling in students ‘a
desire to promote justice, fairness and morality for the poor, disadvantaged and
marginalised members of society’.92 In 2004, the National Pro Bono Resource
Centre published an Information Paper, Pro Bono and Clinical Legal Education
Programs in Australian Law Schools, which identified a diverse range of
clinical courses and not-for-academic-credit pro bono activities in Australian
law schools. The paper noted that clinical and pro bono programs are likely to
have different goals, but described both as ‘vital components of a
comprehensive social justice education at law school’.93
The information paper emphasised that both clinical education and pro
bono activities are on the rise in Australian law schools. Amongst a general
diversification of clinic sites and the emergence of public-interest law clinics,
pro bono agencies like the Public Interest Law Clearing Houses in Victoria,
New South Wales and Queensland now host clinics and also benefit from the
volunteer contributions of students. The information paper illustrates the strong
historical links between clinical teachers and Australian community legal
centres and the strong community service focus of Australian clinics.
In a number of countries, clinical programs initially developed out of
volunteer programs, for instance. Springvale Legal Service operated with very
87 Arup and Laster (2001), pp 1–2.
88 McCrimmon (2003–04), pp 53–54.
91 McCrimmon (2003–04), p 57.
92 McCrimmon (2003–04), p 73.
93 National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2004), p 11.
substantial volunteer input from Monash law students for two years before it
became Australia’s first clinical legal education site. As in a number of other US
law schools, Yale Law School students first became involved in organised
volunteer programs in the late 1920s; however, it took more than 40 years for
this volunteer commitment to develop into a for-credit clinical program.94 The
clinic at the University of Natal, Durban started on a voluntary basis for both
students and academics, but it was six years before students were granted credit
for their work.95
This history suggests that clinical programs may develop from current law
school pro bono initiatives. A volunteer program may be a stepping stone to the
establishment of a clinical program with a heightened focus on community
service. Nonetheless, McCrimmon notes that funding constraints mean that
alternative strategies to promote a public service ethos amongst law students
require consideration.96
It is clear that there is scope to strengthen the links between clinic courses
and pro bono legal service providers, and attention should be paid to mapping
the various possibilities. At the same time, it is important to consider the
question raised by Cath Sylvester as to whether a greater emphasis on pro bono
initiatives will have an adverse impact on the small clinical movement in
England.97 She notes that the existing English clinics ‘have always had, at their
forefront, educational priorities. The increase in pro bono initiatives and greater
involvement of students in legal practical work may compromise this.’98
Clinical Education in Other Disciplines
Clinical education has an extensive tradition in other disciplines, particularly the
health sciences, education and so cial work. McAllister and colleagues refer to
14 groups of health professionals as benefiting from sound clinical education
practices in their field,99 while Brayne and colleagues refer to the use of clinical
methods in the training of students including engineers, linguists, teachers and
computer programmers.100 Legal education appears to be the ‘odd one out’ as a
profession that has not emphasised clinical training.101 It appears that clinical
94 Holland (1999), pp 510–11.
95 David McQuoid-Mason, personal interview at Krakow, 25 July 2004.
96 McCrimmon (2001), p 94.
97 Sylvester (2003).
98 Sylvester (2003), p 36.
99 McAllister et al (2001), p ix. Reference is made to doctors, nurses, physiotherapists, speech
therapists, occupational therapists, social workers, psychologists, dietitians, diversional
therapists, podiatrists, dentists, medical radiation technologists, orthoptists, optometrists and
rehabilitation counsellors.
100 Brayne et al (1998), p 3.
101 The Carnegie Report observes: ‘Compared with the centrality of supervised practice, with
mentoring and feedback, in the education of physicians and nurses or the importance of
supervised practice in the preparation of teachers or social workers, the relative marginality of
clinical training in law schools is striking.’ Sullivan et al (2007), p 24.
legal educators can benefit from actively engaging with like-minded colleagues
from other disciplines, both in terms of refining supervision practices and better
understanding other service delivery models.
While there are valuable insights that can be gained from the theory and
practice of clinical educators in other disciplines, it is important to note that
there are distinctive aspects of clinical method in legal education. While most
disciplines involve solo-student or at most double-student placements, legal
clinics tend to involve six or eight students per session. Other disciplines
utilising clinical methods tend to be more vocation-focused than law. This may
account for clinical learning being less prominent in legal education, as
indicated by its elective status. The need for law graduates to complete further
education prior to admission to practice is another distinguishing feature, which
is discussed in further detail below. The placements in other disciplines also
tend to be longer and more intense. In other disciplines, supervisory processes
include a strong focus on observation of the student interacting, as a
professional, with the client. Live client legal clinics tend not to permit direct
supervisor observation of all aspects of a student’s work. In summary, other
disciplines tend to be using clinical teaching methods in what legal clinicians
would describe as an externship model.
Tomain and Solimine argue that the medical school model of clinical
education does not work in the US law school graduate degree context:
‘Medical school may last ten years or more; we cannot successfully teach skills
beyond the three Rs — legal reading, writing, and research — in only three
years.’102 Cramton refers to both medical and legal education as failing to
sufficiently foster self-learning and intellectual curiosity, ‘despite their critical
importance in the maintenance of professional competence over a long period of
practice in a rapidly changing society’.103 Cramton suggests that legal education
‘errs in giving too little exposure to clinical experience’, and asks whether
medical education errs ‘at the other extreme by devoting too much time to
routine patient care narrowly oriented to body organs rather than the whole
being of the patient’.104
In their book, Facilitating Learning in Clinical Settings, McAllister and
colleagues emphasise professional socialisation and skills development as goals
of clinical education with the goal being interdependent learning.105 They trace
the developing nature of the role of the clinical supervisor, from the clinical
instructor of the 1960s who, ‘with almost “amateurish enthusiasm” drilled
students to reproduce traditional procedures’ to the clinical teacher of the 1980s
with a stronger emphasis on individual student development to the current role
of the clinical educator, ‘developing in students a breadth of personal,
interpersonal and management skills’.106
102 Tomain and Solimine (1990), p 312.
103 Cramton (1986), p 353.
104 Cramton (1986), p 360.
105 McAllister et al (1997), p iii.
106 McAllister et al (1997), p 4.
McAllister and colleagues provide a list of goals of clinical education for
the health science professions which deal with understanding the context in
which professional work takes place, technical competence in client-related
work and the development of an ethical framework.107 They are clear that service
must take precedence over educational goals. With very little discussion, they
state: ‘Since client care is always the priority, clinical educators may, on
occasion, have to place student learning as second priority to ensure that the
optimal client care is provided.’108
Student Supervision
It is interesting to contrast the service focus of clinical education in other
disciplines with the focus on close student supervision which is considered a
hallmark of clinical legal education. The practice-based context of clinical legal
education has the potential to offer a very rich learning environment. However,
the benefits of such an environment may be lost or diluted without close
supervision or if the supervision is not focused on facilitating student learning as
well as on controlling casework. Developing an environment in which students
feel both suitably supported and challenged is a key aspect of the work of the
clinic supervisor. It is also what makes clinical teaching more expensive than
lecture and seminar-based programs.
Australian clinical law teachers have tended to receive limited training in
relation to supervision. They would likely benefit from an enhanced
appreciation of the supervision practices used in the health sciences and other
disciplines. There is a need to articulate and test the assumptions that appear to
be made regarding the effectiveness of those supervision practices used in
private legal practice and in community legal centres.
Clinical models involving provision of advice to real clients require
students to assume responsibility for their actions in a much more direct way
than in oth er forms of legal education. In such programs, students are compelled
to recognise that their actions will influence the well-being of others, namely
their clients: ‘It necessarily follows from the touchstone of “realism” that a
student in role must bear responsibility for the resolution of the problem.’109
Clinical teaching invites the student into relatively ‘uncharted waters’, but
does so with a safety net of support structures involving preliminary preparation
and close supervision. The student is provided with the opportunity to take
greater control over their future learning as they test for themselves the best
ways to approach issues and problems. This relates to the norms of current legal
practice but also, and most importantly, extends to assisting students to develop
a framework for how they will approach the need for ongoing learning and
development throughout their professional life. Amsterdam refers to traditional
legal education as having ‘failed to develop in students ways of thinking within
and about the role of lawyers - methods of critical analysis, planning and
107 McAllister et al (1997), p 11.
108 McAllister et al (1997), p 57.
109 Boon et al (1987), p 67.
decision making which are not themselves practical skills but rather the
conceptual foundations of practical skills and for much else’.110
Effective supervision can also introduce students to the range of
uncertainties which legal professionals must address in their work. These
include uncertainty as to what has taken place and why, whether a client’s
account is likely to be accepted by relevant third parties, which legal doctrines
are relevant to the issue facing the client and how those doctrines are likely to
apply. Assisting students to develop the ability to deal with unstructured
situations is invariably a key objective of live-client clinical programs.
The presence of close supervision enables students to take on work
involving greater responsibility because of the continuing availability of
support. Such supervision may be more difficult to provide in clinics which
prioritise the provision of community service as well as student learning. Rice
refers to this difficulty as follows: ‘A directive approach, giving the student
instructions on the next necessary step to take, may at times be a legacy of a
clinic that serves, as is often the case, the dual purpose of community service
and student education. A clinic should be established so as not to be prey to the
demands of casework that can swamp and compromise clinical supervision.’111
Supervision issues have been an area of disagreement in the US clinical
field between the advocates of different clinical models, particularly between
those endorsing externships and those supportive of in-house clinics. Divergent
views have been taken of the learning benefits from having students supervised
by a practitioner academic rather than an external person who, while often
having lengthy practice experience, must juggle other responsibilities and may
have little experience in working supportively with students.112
Givelber and colleagues have disputed the focus on the significance of
academic supervision. On the basis of their analysis of the ‘co-op’ externships
program at Northeastern University, they suggest that ‘the nature and intensity
of the work are at least as important as any aspect of supervision in explaining
what distinguishes a good learning environment. This finding challenges one of
the bedrock assumptions of clinical methodology — the centrality of an
intensive, education-focused supervisory relationship.’113 Further, they ‘insist
that there is absolutely no empirical support for the notion that learning can
occur only’ under circumstances where ‘a professional educator is on the
110 Amsterdam (1984).
111 Boone et al (1987), p 66.
112 This tension is usefully highlighted in the 1991 AALS Committee Report r eferred to earlier in
this chapter which no ted: ‘There is a marked difference in h ow schools rated the level of
extern supervision. Schools without in-house clinics tended to rate their level of extern
supervision as high, while schools that had in-house clinics most frequently rated extern
supervision as low.’ Various explanations are given for these variations, the most interesting
being that they ‘represent self-serving statements on both sides, with schools having in-house
clinics minimizing the supervision offered to externs, while schools without in-house clinics
seek to defend externships as a viable alternative’. Dinerstein (1991). p 550.
113 Givelber et al (1995), p 3.
scene’.114 Givelber and colleagues found that ‘both the characteristics of the job
and (emphasis in original) the presence of supervision play important roles in
students’ evaluations of their work experiences’.115
It is also worth noting that placing academic supervision as a central pillar
of clinical legal education has the effect of limiting the number of students who
can access clinical learning opportunities. In 1992, Stephen Maher referred to
the focus of US clinics moving from service to education as they became more
reliant on law school resources. Maher criticised the existing ‘clinical
orthodoxy’, which emphasised the importance of ‘close faculty supervision of
case work’ as the ‘touchstone of clinical education’.116 He argued that clinical
teachers might have ‘secured their beachhead within the law school by assuming
the burden of case work and the obligation of orthodoxy’, but had been left
unable to respond to the biggest challenge in clinical legal education: that of
making clinical experiences available to more students.117
Providing Initial Advice: Student or Supervisor?
In a 1984 paper, Robyn Lansdowne and Neil Rees, then the supervising lawyers
in the University of New South Wales clinical program, noted that they faced
the ‘difficult task of leading studen ts to believe that they must accept
responsibility for the conduct of a particular case whilst at the same time
ensuring that our clients are not disadvantaged in any way by student
involvement. In part, we have to create an illusion of responsibility.’118 This has
been described as akin to placing each student on a rope that is ‘gradually let out
if a student is performing well. If a student fails to perform adequately we are
forced to draw in the rope and explore every minor detail of a case with the
How this illusion of responsibility is maintained remains one of the few
significant differences amongst Australian clinical programs. While all
Australian real-client clinical programs provide students with the opportunity to
take instructions from clients without their supervisor being present, different
approaches are taken to the provision of advice to the client once the student and
supervisor have determined what advice is to be provided to the client. When a
client is being interviewed for the first time at either the University of New
South Wales or Newcastle clinic, the student will not advise the client alone.
They do so with their supervisor. Clinical programs outside New South Wales
use the approach pioneered at Monash whereby the student returns to the client
and advises them unaccompanied by a supervisor.
All programs share a similar approach to preparing students for their
involvement in interviewing clients. In the first weeks of their placement,
114 Givelber et al (1995), p 47.
115 Givelber et al (1995), p 38.
116 Maher (1992), p 246.
117 Maher (1992), p 246.
118 Lansdowne and Rees (1984), p 10.
119 Lansdowne and Rees (1984), p 35.
students observe interviews conducted by their supervisor and former students,
and are then involved in intensive seminars using simulations to develop their
interviewing and advising skills. Such a model allows very competent students
to perform to their capacity as opposed to some artificially lower level of
This issue is of particular importance because supervisors do not generally
have the opportunity to observe students as they conduct client interviews.
Several leading Australian clinical teachers advised that they had never
observed students conducting interviews with real clients as opposed to
simulated interviews.121 Some US programs video-record students conducting
interviews, enabling supervisors to provide feedback to students. Of course,
video-recording raises confidentiality issues for clients and is likely to be
disconcerting for at least some students.
The University of New South Wales model is relatively resource intensive,
as several practitioners are required to provide coverage of all interviews
conducted. The University of New South Wales has been able to make
substantial use of lawyers seconded from law firms and government agencies to
provide more time for the practitioner-academics to focus on matters other than
the provision of advice in each case. Former Kingsford Legal Centre Director
Simon Rice views the University of New South Wales approach as appropriate
both from a client service perspective and educationally. While not wanting ‘to
take away the unique student–client dynamic’, he saw ‘a very useful role for a
solicitor to lead by example and teach’ as well as to safeguard the quality of
advice provided ‘when there’s that degree of seriousness’.122 A further value of
the Kingsford model is that the supervisor provides some continuity where the
matter continues beyond one semester and so the client must deal with a
different student. It also provides the client with the confidence that comes from
maintaining a connection with the supervising lawyer.
Leading English clinical scholar Hugh Brayne candidly outlines how he
changed his approach to sitting in on student interviews with clients.123 For his
first four years as a clinical supervisor, Brayne ‘sat in on every student
interview’, thinking ‘that I had a professional responsibility to do so’.
Subsequently, following discussions with clinic teachers in the United States, he
almost never sat in on student–client interviews. He became concerned to avoid
usurping the student’s relationship with the client. Brayne considered that his
previous approach had come from ‘a failure to separate the two goals of legal
service and student learning’.124
While Brayne’s argument in favour of allowing students to conduct their
interviews and provide advice without their supervisor present is compelling,
the best model no doubt depends on the individuals involved, both the
120 Adrian Evans, personal interview at Sydney, 10 December 2002.
121 Simon Rice, personal interview at Sydney, 10 December 2002.
122 Simon Rice, personal interview at Sydney, 14 February 1997.
123 Brayne (1996), pp 172–73.
124 Brayne (1996), p 173.
supervisor and the student. Particularly able students will benefit from the
opportunity to assume greater control over the advice process. The extent of
preparation of students will also be significant. Perhaps the starting point should
be that students should observe interviews conducted by both practitioners and
experienced students. Students may also find it useful to conduct joint
interviews together with a fellow student. For such a mod el to work effectively,
students need to be taught how to effectively provide feedback to their peers.
Supervision arrangements that devolve substantial responsibility to
students need to be supported by structures that effectively prepare students for
this significant duty. Such preparation can occur early in a clinical placement,
and can also be scaffolded by simulated activities in other law studies completed
prior to the start of their clinic-based experience.
The Move to Graduate Clinical Programs
Requirements for law graduates to complete further professional training prior
to admission to practice have influenced the manner in which Australian clinical
legal education has developed over the past decade. In 1996, Rice referred to the
blurring of the line between clinical legal education and practical legal
training.125 While some states provide for law graduates to complete either
articles of clerkship or a Practical Legal Training (PLT) Program in order to
gain professional admission, other states — notably New South Wales — have
removed the articles option and require any law graduate to complete a PLT
program before admission to practice.126 The expansion in New South Wales of
the number of PLT providers has been followed by similar moves in both
Victoria and Queensland.127 In states where articles of clerkship remain an
alternative post-degree route to admission, major national law firms now have
their ‘graduate clerks’ complete a PLT program rather than articles.128
The University of Newcastle Law School was the first in Australia to offer
a program combining completion of a law degree with the post-degree
requirements for admission to legal practice. To achieve this, Newcastle Law
School moved clinical teaching to the centre of the curriculum, aiming to take
the lessons from live-client clinic work into the classroom. Simulations, more a
feature of the PLT landscape at that time than of undergraduate law teaching,
were also used more comprehensively than elsewhere. The Newcastle Legal
Centre was the vehicle developed to operationalise this vision of a ‘clinical law
school’.129 Similar arrangements to fold PLT requirements into the law degree
operate at other law schools, but without the same strong focus on clinic-based
real-client work.
The continuing development and increased prominence of PLT programs
may place pressure on undergraduate clinical programs to focus more directly
125 Rice (1996), p 9.
126 Lamb (2000).
127 For an outline of the system in Queensland, see Kenny (2005).
128 Banham (2000).
129 Rees (1996); Watterson et al (2002); p 13; Boersig (1996).
on skills teaching. Clinical teachers may also receive additional requests to
contribute their practice expertise to non-clinic courses. Of course, such
involvement in other courses may well benefit a clinical program in terms of
enabling the effective preparation of students for subsequent clinical
This focus on legal skills teaching provides a challenge for clinic teachers
in PLT programs to encourage a broad perspective and avoid a transactional
focus. Newcastle Legal Centre founder John Boersig has emphasised that
planners must keep in mind the need to ensure courses do more than simply
teach students simple mechanical tasks like the co mpleting of forms. Such
programs need to emphasise the teaching of generic skills ‘essential to a broad
range of legal activities’,131 along with promoting reflection and critical analysis.
Clinical teachers have skills and expertise that can assist with promoting a broad
client-centred approach to the study of law.
This article has considered some of the issues that will continue to influence the
directions in which clinical legal education programs will continue to develop. It
has emphasised the value of recognising the various purposes — for students,
law schools and legal academics — that can be advanced through the use of
clinical teaching methods. Groups with interests in legal education, including
the practising legal profession, have emphasised the benefits that can be gained
by students through clinic-based learning about the law. Other groups have
highlighted the importance to communities of the legal services provided by
clinical programs. Clinical education is also recognised as important in the
development of ethical frameworks and a focus on the interests and concerns of
While the establishment of new clinical legal education programs is
important, closer attention needs to be paid to sustaining programs over the
long-term. The sustainability of a particular clinical experience within a broader
clinical program requires the setting of realistic objectives (recognising the
variables that impact on this process) and then the careful selection of a model
that will facilitate meeting those objectives. Different models should then be
integrated, where appropriate, and sequenced to enable clinical experiences to
build on the understandings that students have already developed. The
complexity of working with real clients should be seen as the logical
progression of the consolidation and extension of understandings that have
already been developed.
Chapter 5 of the Best Practices Report provides a comprehensive set of best
practice standards that can be used to guide the development of experiential
learning opportunities.132 It encourages clinic teachers to focus on promoting
130 For an effective outline of the links between different models of clinical legal education, see
Maranville (2000–01).
131 Boersig (1996), p 466.
132 Stuckey et al (2007) Ch.5.
those learning opportunities that are particularly well suited to clinic contexts —
ethics and values, skills development and legal problem-solving. The framework
also emphasises the importance of course design, particularly the articulation of
clear objectives and assessment criteria along with the effective provision of
Clinical teaching can also benefit from deeper understanding of the work-
integrated teaching practices used in other disciplines, where clinic-based
learning is more central. It also has the potential to promote opportunities for
multi-disciplinary learning opportunities. This would be a significant step
forward for a discipline that the Carnegie Report describes as striking for its
lack of focus on clinical experiences as part of professional preparation.133
Refe renc es
Sec o n dary S o u r c es
Anthony Amsterdam (1984) ‘Clinical Legal Education — a 21st Century Perspective’ 34 Journal of
Legal Education 612.
Christopher Arup and Kathy Laster (2001) ‘Introduction’ 19 Law in Context 1.
Auditor-General Victoria (2004) Beyond the Triple Bottom Line: Measuring and Reporting on
Sustainability, Victorian Government.
C Banham (2000) ‘Big Firms Take Student Training In-House’ 5 May, Justinian.
David Barnhizer, (1979) ‘The Clinical Method of Legal Instruction: Its Theory and Implementation’
30 Journal of Legal Education 67.
Frank Bloch and Iqbal Ishar (1990) ‘Legal Aid, Public Service and Clinical Legal Education: Future
Directions From India and the United States’ 12 Michigan Journal of Internation al Law 92.
John Boersig (1996) ‘Clinical Legal Education: The Newcastle University Model’, paper presented
at the Australasian Professional Legal Education Council International Conference, Skills
Development for Tomorrow’s Lawyers: Needs and Strategies, Sydney, September, published in
Conference Papers Vol 1.
Andrew Boon, Michael Jeeves and Julie MacFarlane (1987) ‘Clinical Anatomy: Towards a Working
Definition of Clinical Legal Education’ 21 Law Teacher 61.
Andrew Boon (2001) Paper presented to University of Westminster Making Good Lawyers:
Challenges to Vocational Legal Education conference, 26 September.
Hugh Brayne (1996) ‘Law Students as Practitioners: Developing an Undergraduate Clinical
Programme at Northumbria University’, in J Webb and C Maughan (eds), Teaching Lawyers’
Skills, Butterworths.
Hugh Brayne, Nigel Duncan and Richard Grimes (1998) Clinical Legal Education: Active Learning
in Your Law School, Blackstone.
Robert Condlin (1983) ‘Clinical Education in the Seventies: an Appraisal of the Decade’ 33 Journal
of Legal Education 604.
Roger Cramton (1986) ‘Professional Education in Medicine and Law: Structural Differences,
Common Failings, Possible Opportunities’ 34 Cleveland State Law Review 349.
133 Sullivan et al (2007) p 24.
Liz Curran (2004) ‘Innovations in an Australian Clinical Legal Education Program: Students
Making a Difference in Generatin g Positive Change’ 4 International Journal of Clinical Legal
Education 162.
Judith Dickson and Mary Anne Noone (1996) ‘The Challenge of Teaching Professional Ethics’,
paper presented at the Australasian Professional Legal Education Council International
Conference, Skills Development for Tomorrow’s Lawyers: Needs and Strategies, Sydney, New
South Wales, September, Conference Papers, Vol 2.
Robert Dinerstein (1991) ‘Report of the Committee on the Future of the In- House Clinic’ 41 Journal
of Legal Education 508.
Michael Dowdle (2000–01) ‘Preserving Indigenous Paradigms in an Age of Globalization:
Pragmatic Strategies for the Development of Clinical Legal Aid in China’ 24 Fordham
International Law Journal S56.
Dexter Dunphy, Andrew Griffiths and Suzanne Benn (2003) Organizational Change for Corporate
Sustainability, Routledge.
Adrian Evans (1996) ‘Specialised Clinical Legal Education Begins in Australia’ 21(2) Alternative
Law Journal 79.
Adrian Evans (1998) ‘The Values Priority in Quality Legal Education: Developing a Values/Skills
Link Through Clinical Experience’ 32(3) Law Teacher 274.
Adrian Evans (1999) ‘Client Group Activism and Student Moral Development in Clinical Legal
Education’ 10 Legal Education Review 179.
Adrian Evans (2001a) ‘Efficacy Beyond Reasonable Doubt?’ 19 Law in Context 89.
Adrian Evans (2001b) ‘Lawyers’ Perspectives of Their Values: An Empirical Assessment of
Monash University Graduates in Law, 1980–1998’ 12 Legal Education Review 209.
Adrian Evans and Josephine Palermo (2006) ‘Preparing Australia’s Future Lawyers: An Exposition
of Changing Values Over Time in the Context of Teaching about Ethical Dilemmas’
11(1) Deakin Law Review 103.
Mark Galanter and Thomas Palay (1991) The Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the
Big Law Firm, University of Chicago Press.
Shelley Gavigan (1997) ‘Twenty-five Years of Dynamic Tension: The Parkdale Community Legal
Services Experience’ 35(3) Osgoode Hall Law Journal 443.
Jeff Giddings (1992) ‘Casework, Bloody Casework’ 17(6) Alternative Law Journal 261.
Jeff Giddings (1999) ‘A Circle Game: Issues in Australian Clinical Legal Education’ 10(1) Legal
Education Review 33.
Jeff Giddings (2003) ‘Clinical Legal Education in Australia: A Historical Perspective
3 International Journal of Clinical Legal Education 7.
Jeff Giddings (2005) ‘Clinical Sustainability’, Keynote address to the 3rd International Journal of
Clinical Legal Education Conference, Melbourne, 14 July.
Daniel Givelber, Brooke Baker, John McDevitt and Robyn Miliano (1995) ‘Learning Through
Work: An Empirical Study of Legal Internships’ 45(1) Journal of Legal Education 1.
Andrew Goldsmith (2002) ‘Why Should Law Matter? Towards a Clinical Model of Legal
Education’ 25(3) UNSW Law Journal 721.
Kerry Greenwood (1994) It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time: A History of Springvale Legal
Service 1973–1993, Springvale Legal Service.
Richard Grimes (1995) ‘Reflections on Clinical Legal Education’ Law Teacher 169.
Richard Grimes (1996) ‘The Theory and Practice of Clinical Legal Education’, in J Webb and
C Maughan (eds), Teaching Lawyers’ Skills, Butterworths.
Laura Holland (1999) ‘Invading the Ivory Tower: The History of Clinical Education at Yale Law
School’ 49(4) Journal of Legal Education 504.
Richard Johnstone and Sumitra Vignaendra (2003), Learning Outcomes and Curriculum
Development in Law, Australian University Teaching Committee.
C Kenny (2005) ‘Graduate Legal Training — The New Regime’ July Proctor 12.
Mary Anne Kenny and Anna Copeland (2000) ‘Clinical Legal Education and Refugee Cases:
Teaching Law Students About Human Rights’ 25(5) Alternative Law Journal 252.
Sue Kenny (1999) Developing Communities for the Future: Community Development in Australia,
Kingsford Legal Centre (2007) Clinical Legal Education Guide, Kingsford Legal Centre.
Ainslie Lamb (2000) ‘Preparation for Practice: Recent Developments in Practical Legal Training in
Australia’, paper presented at the Commonwealth Legal Education Association Conference,
Adelaide, April.
Robyn Lansdowne and Neil Rees (1984) ‘Kingsford Legal Centre: A Clinical Experience’, paper
presented to the conference of the Australian Law Teachers Association.
Paul Maharg (2007) Transforming Legal Education: Learning and Teaching the Law in the Early
Twenty-first Century, Ashgate.
Stephen Maher (1992) ‘No Easy Walk to Freedom’ 1 District of Columbia Law Review 243.
Deborah Maranville (2000–01) ‘Passion, Context, an d Lawyering Skills: Choosing Among
Simulated and Real Client Experiences’ 7 Clinical Law Review 123.
Lindy McAllister, Michelle Lincoln, Sharynne McLeod and Diana Maloney (2001), Facilitating
Learning in Clinical Settings, Nelson Thornes.
Les McCrimmon (2001) ‘Law School Clinics Plus’ 19 Law in Context 92.
Les McCrimmon (2003–04) ‘Mandating a Culture of Service: Pro Bono in the Law School
Curriculum’ 14(1) Legal Education Review 53.
David McQuoid-Mason (1982) An Outline of Legal Aid in South Africa, Butterworths.
Bruce Moore (ed) (1999) The Australian Oxford Dictionary, Oxford University Press.
Mary Anne Noone and Judith Dickson (2002) ‘Teaching Towards a New Professionalism:
Challenging Law Students to Become Ethical Lawyers’ 4(2) Legal Ethics 127.
National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2004) Information Paper — Pro Bono and Clinical Legal
Education Programs in Australian Law Schools, National Pro Bono Resource Centre.
David Pearce, Enid Campbell and Donald Harding (1987) Australian Law Schools: A Discipline
Assessment for the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission: A Summary and Volume 1,
Allen Redlich (1970–71) ‘Perceptions of a Clinical Program’ 44 Southern California Law Review
Neil Rees (1996) ‘A Clinical Law School’ 6 University of Newcastle Centre for Advancement of
Learning and Teaching Newsletter 2.
Simon Rice (1996) A Guide to Implementing Clinical Teaching Method in the Law School
Curriculum, Centre for Legal Education (Sydney).
Ysaiah Ross (2001) Ethics in Law: Lawyers’ Professional Responsibility and Accountability in
Australia, 3rd ed., Butterworths.
Philip Schrag and Michael Meltsner (1998) Reflections on Clinical Legal Education, Northeastern
University Press.
Roy Stuckey et al (2007) Best Practices for Legal Education: A Vision and a Road Map, Clinical
Legal Education Association.
Irene Styles and Archie Zariski (2001) ‘Law Clinics and the Promotion of Public Interest
Lawyering’ 19 Law in Context 65.
William Sullivan, Anne Colby, Judith Wegner, Lloyd Bond and Lee Shulman (2007) Educating
Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law, Jossey-Bass.
Cath Sylvester (2003) ‘Bridging the Gap? The Effect of Pro Bono Initiatives on Clinical Legal
Education in the UK’ 3(1) International Journal of Clinical Legal Education 29.
Joseph Tomain and Michael Solimine (1990) ‘Skills Skepticism in the Postclinic World’ 40 Journal
of Legal Education 307.
Ray Watterson, Robert Cavanagh and John Boersig (2002) ‘Law School Based Public Interest
Advocacy’ 2 International Journal of Clinical Legal Education 1.
Lucy White (1997) ‘The Transformative Potential of Clinical Legal Education’ 35(3) Osgoode Hall
Law Journal 603.
Rick Wilson (2002) ‘Three Law School Clinics in Chile, 1970–2000: Innovation, Resistance and
Conformity in the Global South’ 8 Clinical Law Review 515.
David Yencken (2001) Where Are We Going? Comprehensive Social, Cultural, Environmental and
Economic Reporting, The Australian Collaboration (Melbourne).
Ca s e s
Eastman v The Queen [2000] HCA 29.
Williams v The Minister Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 and The State of New South Wales [2000]
NSWCA 255.
... 82 3 Practical Workshops As Giddings points out, legal clinics have become 'an obvious link between the academy and the practising profession, and can consolidate their place within law schools through the development of effective professional alliances.' 83 The Clinic engages with the legal profession by offering seminars of interest to lawyers, judges, prosecutors, legal advisors, and rights activists. 84 The Clinic endeavours to tackle difficult legal issues in which few jurists have expertise. ...
... These relate to the program learning outcomes, the program activities and the program evaluation. Giddings (2008) states that while the 'practice based context of clinical legal education has the potential to offer a very rich learning environment', these benefits can be lost in an environment without the necessary supervision or control. Clinical programs, like all educational programs, must have clearly enumerated objectives setting out the learning outcomes student participants are expected to achieve upon completion of the program. ...
... 12 JeffGiddings (2008) 'Contemplating the Future of Clinical Legal Education' 17 Griffith Law Review 1, at 17� See also Angela Macfarlane and Paul McKeown, (2008) '10 Lessons for New Clinicians' 13 International Journal of Clinical Legal Education 65, at 68 13 Lydia Bleasdale-Hill (2011) The Experience of Establishing and Maintaining Pro Bono Projects Within an Educational Setting: A Narrative pp�29-30 14 Indeed, the success of the Leeds clinic demonstrates that an externally-supervised model can offer real benefit to all three key stakeholders� 15 Primarily gained through the experience of interviewing a number of colleagues running Clinics at several institutions -see Lydia Bleasdale-Hill (2011) The Experience of Establishing and Maintaining Pro Bono Projects Within an Educational Setting: A Narrative Models of Clinic and Their Value to Students, Universities and the Community in the post-2012 Fees Era International Journal of Clinical Legal Education Issue 19 ...
Full-text available
p>The number of clinics in existence within higher education institutions has continued to proliferate in recent years. The 2011 LawWorks1 report examining the pro bono work undertaken within Universities in the United Kingdom found that at least 61 per cent of all Law schools now offer pro bono activities to their students,2 with 40 respondents offering clinic. This compares with 53 per cent of respondents offering pro bono activity and 11 respondents offering clinical activities in 2006. This evidence suggests that an increasing number of Law Schools recognise the benefits of clinic to students. However, the arrival of a new era in higher education funding arguably requires some reflection on (and perhaps greater articulation of) those benefits and the priorities of clinic activity overall, in order to ensure that the expectations of the key clinic stakeholders (the hosting institution, student volunteers and participating members of the public) are met. Concerns that the significant reduction in state funding for higher education will impact adversely on institutional resources is well-documented and at an institutional level there is likely to be increased scrutiny of the efficiency of devoting scarce resources to clinic activity in a climate of lower (or potentially lower) income streams and leaner budgets. Similarly, some students are likelyto exhibit a heightened sense of wanting value for money in their expectations of clinical education and may well demand greater input in the design of clinic activity. Against this, there has been a general and significant reduction in funding for the provision of free legal advice and an associated increased demand amongst the general public for quality free legal advice and access to justice. Therefore, for new and established clinicians alike, the post-2012 era provides the opportunity for, if not necessitates, reflection on the expectations and ambitions of the three key clinic stakeholders (the host institution, the student volunteers and the general public) and, particularly, the question of whether they are sufficiently aligned with each other and the priorities of the clinic activity in place. Arguably, the possibility of conflicting priorities for clinic originating from these key stakeholders and methods of resolving them has featured little in the academic commentary. This paper seeks to contribute to such a debate by offering some insights into resolving these tensions. Taking the interests of each stakeholder in turn, this paper discusses methods of maximising the efficiency of administering the clinic and managing student expectations.</p
... FYCP was designed to support students as they transition both to the discipline and the law school community (Kift, 2009), and encourage them to explore and develop their emerging professional identity (Field et al., 2014) as early as possible. University student-operated legal clinics seek to balance three competing objectives: effecting student learning; social and community justice goals; and providing professional and competent legal advice for clients (Evans et al, 2012;Giddings, 2008). In the FYCP clinical setting, our intention was that students would gain insight into the practical application of legal concepts. ...
Full-text available
This Practice Report discusses the first year of operation of the First Year Clinic Placement Program (FYCP) at Flinders Law School. Lizzio (2006) identifies five key areas (or senses) as important in supporting transition into study: connectedness, capability, resourcefulness, purpose and culture. His sense of culture incorporates clear values, and his sense of purpose incorporates notions of personal development, vocational direction and disciplinary engagement. Embedded in a first year compulsory topic, this FYCP initiative draws on Lizzio’s five senses, and has potential to provide a transformative experience for students, supporting them to develop a positive identity as a holistic legal professional, commencing at enrolment. We envision this as the first stage in a vertically integrated curriculum.
Full-text available
This article introduces the modern legal education scene in Palestine, by sharing the experience in setting up and running the clinical programmes of Hebron University. The article pursues a comparative approach by reviewing models of successful clinical programmes in various countries and by shedding light on the existing clinics at Hebron University. It warns, however, that despite achievements, the future of clinical pedagogy in the country remains uncertain. It may take years for clinics to build a solid base within the legal education system. Law schools have yet to develop a clear place for clinics within the curricula. The writer argues that the capacity of clinics to advance legal education, complement the apprenticeship stage, strengthen the legal profession and become a legal aid provider is unbounded. Building a coherent clinical system that is parallel to the systems of professional training, law practice and legal aid will require other reforms.
Full-text available
Clinical subjects are a new model in Faculty of Law Hasanuddin University’s curriculum. It currently is implementing four legal clinics: (1) a civil law clinic; (2) a criminal law clinic; (3) an anti-corruption law clinic; and (4) an environmental law clinic. All of these clinics have been adopted in FH-UNHAS’s curriculum. This paper will focus on those subjects as new clinics and the students as new clinicians. It also discusses many challenges we face in managing the clinics and ensuring that all clinic students are able to engage in quality programming while working with our partners (local civil society organizations [CSOs] and formal justice institutions, such as District Courts and Provincial Prosecutor Offices).
Technical Report
Full-text available
Clinical legal education (CLE) is a significant method of learning and teaching in law. It is intensive, often one-on-one in nature and exhibits a justified expectation that students, who are commonly self-selecting, will ‘do well’ as they apply legal theory and develop lawyering skills to solve simulated and real-client legal problems. Clinical pedagogy involves a system of self-critique and supervisory feedback so that law students learn how to learn from their experience. The high staff-student ratio and collaborative learning environments support a climate in which each student is motivated to improve and perform at their best. In its common focus on real clients, students are motivated by the inescapable personal responsibility of working with and being accountable to those clients, to perform to the best of their ability. The result for participating students is a profound consolidation of substantive legal knowledge with the practicalities, compromises and successes of contemporary legal practice. This project has involved an in-depth 27-month investigation of all identifiable Australian CLE programs. The project has confirmed to team members that, while there is a growing consciousness of the advantages of CLE to law schools and law students, there is still only a very limited awareness in conventional academia of the transforming potential of CLE – a long-term strategy to lift the reputation and hence the international ranking of many law schools. In a globalising legal education environment where clinical methods are increasingly becoming integral to the high-quality legal education landscape, it is a matter of regret that the funding of Australian legal education does not prioritise clinical approaches within law curricula, let alone seek the integration of clinical methodology into those curricula. In the expectation that this state of affairs must change (and in order to provoke that change), this project has galvanised clinical supervisors’ opinions around Australia and identified an extensive number of best practices for Australian CLE. These best practices constitute the recommendations arising from the project, and are organised under seven themes comprising Course Design, Law in Context in a Clinical Setting, Reflective Student Learning, Assessment, Supervision, Staff and Infrastructure.
Full-text available
p>This article presents a case for law schools to undertake public interest advocacy. It argues that incorporating public interest advocacy into curricula and research enhances clinical legal education and enables law schools to make a distinctive and valuable contribution to justice and law reform. The article outlines an integrated model for law school based public interest advocacy based on the experience of one of Australia’s newest law schools at Newcastle in the Hunter region of New South Wales. The article then describes a recent public interest case undertaken by academics, clinicians and students at Newcastle law school, explaining their participation in the case and exploring the contributions made by the case to legal education, the correction of injustice and reform of the law. The case, one of Australia’s most controversial deaths in custody, concerned the fatal shooting on Bondi Beach in Sydney in June 1997 of French photographer Roni Levi. The article examines the shooting, its investigation by police, a coroner and an independent commission of inquiry. It analyses the flaws in these legal investigations, considers their justice implications, and outlines the legal and policing reforms achieved through the case. The article concludes with the suggestion that changes in law school culture as well as curriculum are needed to ensure that law schools embrace public interest advocacy and other forms of clinical legal education for the future benefit of the law and its students.</p
Full-text available
This paper will examine why in my view student lawyers who one day soon will be fully-fledged practitioners have a vital role in law reform. It will firstly draw on some of the commentary on the topic and then discuss the program I run at the West Heidelberg Community Legal Service (the legal service) which seeks to actively encourage students to view law reform as their responsibility as lawyers in the community. I should state that the approach of the law reform projects of the clinic I will discuss are still a “work in progress” as we are constantly refining and developing the process to heighten its effectiveness on those who make the laws and administer the laws which impact upon the community.
Full-text available
Legal education in the UK has undergone significant changes over the last decade and is once again under review. Whilst there is now wide spread acceptance of the benefits of experiential learning in educational terms and a focus on the distinction between deep and surface learning, clinical legal education in the UK has remained firmly on the sidelines.
The article focuses on real client clinical work with participating students being supervised by lawyer academics while also referring to other models. This model has enabled clinics to retain a strong commitment to community service whilst also facilitating close work with small groups of students.
Since this classic book was first published in 2003, sustainability has increasingly become mainstream business for leading corporations, whilst the topic itself has also been a hotly debated political issue across the globe. The sustainability phase models originally discussed in the book have become more relevant with ever more examples of organizations at later stages in the development of corporate sustainability. Bringing together global issues of ecological sustainability, strategic human resource management, organizational change, corporate social responsibility, leadership and community renewal, this new edition of the book further develops its unified approach to corporate sustainability and its plan of action to bring about corporate change. It integrates new research and brings illustrative case studies up to date to reflect how new approaches affect change and leadership. For the first time, a new positive model of a future sustainable world is included -strengthened by references to the global financial crisis, burgeoning world population numbers and the rise of China. With new case studies including BP's Gulf oil spill and Tokyo Electric Company's nuclear reactor disaster, this new edition will again be core reading for students and researchers of sustainability and business, organizational change and corporate social responsibility.