For more than 150 years, legal education has largely followed the course charted by Christopher Columbus Langdell when he became dean of Harvard Law School in 1870. Langdell’s innovations included the case method, high-stakes summative assessments, and preferences for faculty members with experience in “learning law” rather than practicing it. His proposals were innovative and responsive to challenges in legal education at the time, but this Article argues that taking Langdell’s approach to reform—including a willingness toimplement radical changes in the face of institutional shortcomings—requires reimagining his methods for the benefit of today’s students. We identify key deficiencies of the Langdellian method, which was devised for a different set of students and at a time when we knew far less about how people learn. And we propose reforms, recommending inclusive course design that encompasses a broad range of competencies for a broad range of practices and inclusive pedagogical practices in both teaching and assessment. We also encourage all members of the law school community to share responsibility for implementing these reforms rather than relying on only a few “front-line” faculty and staff.

Document Type


Publication Date