Continuing Legal Education / CLE, Law Professors

CLE – Continuously Lucrative 'Education'

So, what’s the difference between good CLE and bad CLE?

By  
on

help bored lawyer CLE continuing legal educationJeena Cho likely took some heat for criticizing continuing legal education (CLE). I have some objections to it as well.

I personally don’t mind certain types of CLEs. For example, I don’t mind going to ABA events, even if the first ten minutes involve watching the speakers pat themselves on the back. Eventually, they will say some interesting yet carefully crafted remarks. It’s all in the game.

Of course, my state bar requires me to prove I was present at those CLE events. It then requires me to pay again to assure my compliance. That’s in the game, too.

This arrangement went on for over a decade. But it ended badly when my state bar complained that I had not complied with their CLE requirements. It seems that the ABA stopped sending them confirmation I was present. Thus, I had to download a form and sign it. Somehow… that proved I was present, as opposed to e-mails from numerous colleagues declaring I was present.

This isn’t the first time I’ve had a bad CLE encounter with my state bar. My first encounter with CLE was when I was forced to travel several hours for a mandatory CLE that my bar gives to new lawyers. It didn’t apply to me at all. I was listening to a discussion about solo practice, despite the fact I worked for the government. My time was wasted, my employer’s time was wasted, and I learned nothing that I would ever apply in practice. On the bright side, I got to stand in the back and talk to old friends.

So, what’s the difference between good CLE and bad CLE? Jeena Cho has some ideas on the way CLE is taught, and I approve. The content also matters. Something in my area of practice is far more enticing than general CLE. But, let’s face it, even when the content is up your alley sometimes it isn’t presented so well.

Let’s walk through a CLE I just took from my state bar because I needed to meet its ethics requirements. This requirement I could not in good conscience claim I received at many ABA events I attended (I skipped those sessions).

Sponsored

0:00 – :05 The CLE opens with a discussion of committee business. I’m thrilled to be learning about the Committee. Now I get to hear about the Committee members. I looked them up online, so I’m not going to listen right now. I’ll take this moment to grab some coffee.

:05 – :07 Speaker tells a joke. It goes on and on. It has nothing to do with the CLE topic. It’s a funny joke though. Maybe I’ll tweet it. Or nah.

:07 – :09 Another speaker tells a joke. I’m not opposed to jokes, except when I have to pay the state bar for them and they don’t relate to the material. Of course bar material should be entertaining. It shouldn’t be stodgy and boring. But it should be relevant, too.

:09 Equipment failure. Fixed in a minute. New slide! I can’t wait.

:10 Slide skipped. I was wrong about the slide being fixed.

Sponsored

:11 In a discussion about civility, speaker suggests another bar is not civil, and he would never practice law in that state because all the lawyers are just so rude.

:12 Listing of rules for civility. I think about the irony of this slide as a segue.

:12 – :14 War story.

:14 – :16 Discussion of specific rules relating to practice area which isn’t mine.

:16 – :18 Discussion of how things don’t have to be in writing, but should be, followed by a discussion of another situation inapplicable to my area of practice.

:16 – :20 Discussion of joint representation in family law cases. I don’t practice family law.

:20 – :24 Speaker reads slides quoting state supreme court.

:24 – :26 Speaker says members of judiciary have differing views on civility. Really?

:27 – :30 Audience member next to me having a coughing spasm. I’m a bit distracted, but it seems like I’m missing a war story.

:31 – :35 Discussion of something that doesn’t apply to me, related to solo practice.

:36 – :38 Questions. Answered many times with “I believe that you can.” Not at all convinced the speaker is correct, or thinks he’s correct.

:39 – :40 Person in audience tells a war story. Audience starts chiming in with personal opinions.

:41 – :43 Inaudible question. Tune out time.

:44 – :46 Figured out the question. Situation does not apply to me. Discussion continues.

:46 – :50 Profound quote and discussion of rules. Listening intently.

:50 – :54 Audience member sitting next to me still coughing. Looking in my briefcase for a cough drop.

:54 – :55 Audience applause, and I immediately bolt from the room.

I learned something useful for 10 minutes or so. Then again, it could have been so much more. It could have been engaging. It could have been riveting. Most importantly, I could have learned so much more!

Instead, the CLE wasted my time. I left dreading CLEs. I wonder about my next great CLE compliance challenge. Maybe I’ll look into the D.C. Bar. Or maybe my state bar can be more thoughtful in terms of the programs it puts on, its requirements for CLE, and what it means to comply with them.

Earlier: Why Do CLEs Suck So Badly?

LawProfBlawg is an anonymous professor at a top 100 law school. You can see more of his musings here and on Twitter. Email him at lawprofblawg@gmail.com.

Topics

, , , , ,