My Canadian Adventure

I spent the 2009-10 academic year at the University of Toronto, getting an L.L.M. My work focused on land use and environmental law - but the differences between Canadian and American legal education were more striking than any differences in substantive law.

I wasn’t exposed to the first-year curriculum (which seems to be fairly similar, at least in subject matter, to the typical American first-year curriculum), but I did take one large upperclass course (administrative law) , one medium-sized course (environmental law), and a few smaller courses- so I have some sense of how classes are conducted.

Needless to say, I noticed a variety of differences. One difference is that Canadian legal education is a much smaller-scale enterprise than American legal education. In most of my courses, teachers assembled their own materials rather than using textbooks; I suspect that this may be related to the fact that there are only sixteen law schools in the entire nation, which means that there is a pretty limited market for textbooks. Thus, it probably makes economic sense to write a textbook only for the most widely taken courses.

Canadian law schools are also smaller and cheaper than their U.S. counterparts. I paid only $20,000 for my year at Toronto, and Canadians paid about one-third as much. I had no class with over 50 students, and most of my classes had 30 or fewer.

Toronto’s law school is also less physically impressive than most U.S. schools I have seen. The law school is housed in a couple of old mansions, and classroom technology is virtually nonexistent. While American schools now have built-in computers, Toronto professors who wish to make a computer presentation bring a laptop to class and get technical assistance to show the computer on the screen- something that happened about once per semester

Teaching styles differ as well. I saw no use of the Socratic method; instead, teachers used a mix of lecture and discussion, much like American undergraduate teachers. Some teachers were more lecture-oriented, others more discussion-oriented, but no teacher called on students.

As in undergraduate schools, final exams are less important. I took six classes (not counting two one-credit mini-courses). In one class, the grade was based on three papers. In three others, the grade was based on a mix of short papers and one final assignment (a paper in two courses, an exam in one). In only two classes was the entire grade based on a final exam.

Canadian law school hiring is similar to hiring for undergraduate faculty, in the sense that there is more emphasis on degrees. The most prestigious Canadian law schools typically require that new hires have a S.J.D. or a Ph.D; based on what I have read and heard, other schools require an L.L.M. (the traditional requirement for a Canadian faculty job). Very rarely will Canadian schools hire someone whose final degree is a J.D.

By contrast, in American schools, most faculty have J.Ds only; although American schools demand more from entry-level faculty than was the case a few decades ago, our focus is on teaching and publishing experience rather than extra degrees. I suspect that this may be a result of the greater size of American legal education; with about 200 law schools (each with its own journal), it is much easier to get published somewhere, and thus easier for schools to demand more publications. On the other hand, the soaring cost of U.S. higher education may constrict the supply of prospective hires with L.L.Ms and S.J.Ds.

 

-- Michael Lewyn

Comments

[US Educated Cdn Law Prof]

Dear Mr. Lewyn,

I am glad to see you enjoyed your Canadian education, however, I would be remiss if I didn't point out some of the inaccuracies in your observations.

First, many professors in Canada use textbooks and the market for textbooks, although much smaller than the US, is still robust. Professors who assemble their own materials do so because usually because they are not happy with the texts on the market or wish to push forward a point of view or angle that is not represented in the mainstream market. This, by the way, is not a Canadian thing. Many of my professors at Columbia Law School did the same thing.

Second, law school in Canada is cheaper than in the US because it is partially subsidized by the government. Incidentally, you paid too much for your Canadian education. You could have attended several other similar caliber law schools in Canada for half of what you paid to go to Toronto.

Third, technology power in the classroom is very school specific. There are Canadian law schools with classrooms that have technology power that would make NASA scream with envy (okay a bit of an overstatement, but you get the picture)

Fourth, the Socratic method is alive and well in Canada as are 100 percent final exams. It just depends on the interests of individual professors.

Finally, I think you missed the value of the extra degrees required by the Canadian system. A Ph.D./SJD requirement assures the prospective employer that the professor can complete a substantial piece of research and writing. Thus, in most cases new professors will have both publications and a completed (or in progress) thesis. Moreover, as you may have noticed, many Canadians have higher degrees from American universities (and usually ivy league schools) so the cost issue you raise is equally applicable to many Canadians.

[Colin Picker]

Very interesting - even if somewhat inaccurate.

I believe experiences such as you had are very valuable and would wish more American legal academics had such experiences. I applaud you for undertaking the degree.

However, as I suggest to all new comparatists (for that is what you have become) - be sure to understand the full context and be careful of generalizations (especially based on little data). A small example highlights the issue - you suggest their law schools are a "smaller scale" than is the case in the US. Yet, the population of Canada is considerably smaller than the US, and so per capita it very well might be, though I do not know, that their law schools occupy a larger scale than do ours! I do know that the impact of Canadian legal academics is huge outside of Canada, both as a saught after destination for post grad studies and through the contributions of their academics in the world legal academy.

While I might point out many areas where your comments suggest inaccuracies (ones that most American legal academics would also make, so please do not feel bad) I want to focus on just one - the substantive law comment. Far from the differences being small, in much of Canada their version of the Civil Law is taught - and not just in Quebec (e.g., Ottawa offers a Civil Law degree). Additionally, their Constitutional Law is very different - from their provincial-federal divisions to their handling of rights.

As some might know, in addition to being a comparatist (focusing on Common Law and Mixed systems), I have now moved to teach in an Australian law school. I am finding it very different, and will one day write about it - though at the moment remain more confused than clear on how it all works.

[Jordan 6]

The morning is a good start, The night is worrying over, Sunny day brings you all happy, Rainy days you all sad, shower, No matter whether the morning rain at night, Happiness always sunny, with you!

[Michael Lewyn]

When I wrote that Canadian law schools were "smaller" I meant in raw numbers, not compared to the national population.

The largest school in Canada, Osgoode Hall, has a first-year class of 302. (see http://www.top-law-schools.com/canadian-law-school-rankings.html
at the bottom of the page).

By contrast, Florida Coastal, where I teach, has a first year class of over 600- and there are some schools that are even larger.

[Michael Lewyn]

And just to clarify some more:

Re textbooks- I did not mean to suggest that no one ever uses casebooks in Canada. I did see plenty of casebooks lying around, especially for first-year courses. But having said that, I do think there is a difference; I find it hard to believe that many American law students go through a full year without one casebook.

Re the first-year curriculum: obviously, there are significant differences in the substance of the law, and some differences in course requirements as well. My point was that at Toronto, as in American law schools, the 1L curriculum mandated private law courses such as torts and contracts, while the 2L and 3L curricula involved more electives. (Though a little internet research reveals that in Canada, as in the US, some schools have more upperclass requirements than others).

Re the Socratic method: My sense from student gossip was that calling on students was pretty rare even in 1L courses.

But I should have made it clear I was describing my experience, since I don't have first-hand experience of any other law schools in Canada. (Similarly, I should have made the same point about technology; for all I know, Toronto may lag behind other schools in this category).