Law School Preparation: An Interdisciplinary Approach

Posted on November 3, 2011 by Keith Brown — No Comments ↓

Found myself reading through old college papers tonight and came across my senior thesis. It’s a great reminder that no matter what the subject, tackling life is always easier with a multidisciplinary approach. This is probably one of my favorite papers I wrote in school, and at more than 7,000 words it’s extremely thorough.

If you enjoy legal studies, or just want to learn something new, grab a cup of coffee and have at it. Would appreciate any legal feedback, as I never got around to attending law school. Regardless of what you do with your life, I’ve always found things to be more enjoyable if you expand your horizons and take an interdisciplinary approach to solving problems. Surround yourself with people of different skill sets, and never stop learning!

The Essential Skills, Principles, and Knowledge Necessary for a Student of Law:

An Interdisciplinary Case by Keith Brown

Interdisciplinary Studies 4391, Section 003

The University of Texas at Arlington - Fall 2008

Opening Statements

With each passing year thousands of undergraduates across the United States enter the nation’s law schools poised to gain the competency necessary to become a successful legal representative. Students come from various disciplines, cultures, and regions, all with the common desire to pursue higher learning in the field of jurisprudence. While diversity among entering freshmen adds new ideas and perspective, a lack of diversity in undergraduate coursework puts some at a competitive disadvantage. If that same range of disciplines hinders exposure to essential skills, then that same valued diversity has created a learning imbalance among the student body. These students, no doubt well-equipped in many areas, must furthermore be proficient in critical thinking, technical communication, and human behavior. This knowledge is helpful in an understanding of the history and complexity of United States Law. Unable to cope with the stress and workload involved in many first-year law programs, students find it difficult to transition from undergraduate work devoid of challenging and interdisciplinary classes.

The student who comes to law school lacking a broad range of basic abilities and experience will face a demanding course load. Deficiencies in areas that can easily be improved during undergraduate studies siphon valuable time from upper level classes which are of greater importance. In some cases, difficulties will deter students to the point of discontinuing law school altogether. It is imperative that law schools and colleges alike rethink the “anything goes” approach to degree recommendations. Though the diversity brings added perspective to the classroom, the foundation of essential principles, knowledge, and skills a student brings with them to law school can greatly affect their experience and relative success while attending.

There is never a shortage of applicants to the top law programs in the country. Amid Grades, LSAT scores, and other factors, admission committees routinely review thousands of possible candidates only to admit a few hundred each year. The question becomes what comprises a so called “ideal” undergraduate scholar? While the American Bar Association and other nationally recognized institutions remain neutral on a suggested degree, it is obvious that a thriving career in law requires expertise in far more than a single academic discipline. An interdisciplinary approach combining skills from multiple disciplines is a highly effective way to learn and develop the multitude of skills required. By using disciplinary insights from a variety of perspectives, a law student can create a more complete set of values supporting them in their continued studies (Repko, 2005).

Many disciplines are utilized to add insight to a candidate’s repertoire of abilities. First, there are the obvious core sub disciplines that are vital to the study of law such as political science and history. There are many schools of jurisprudential thought connected to these disciplines such as: Natural, Positivist, Declaratory, Sociological, and Political. Each one while different in their current position regarding the nature of law, cannot deny the history behind the political influence of the American Constitution. It becomes problematic to analyze current law without a grasp of important judicial decisions throughout our nation’s history. Relying heavily on history alone will only lend so much in today’s diverse culture of law. Understanding of additional concepts remains grounded in disciplines such as: philosophy, the social sciences, psychology, communication, the humanities, English, and multicultural studies.

The most applicable disciplines discussed in this paper will be political science, communication, and psychology. Although training for law school should include much more than the aforementioned subjects, studies based in large part around multiple relative disciplinary perspectives are the most successful in preparation for the various challenges faced by first year law students. The goal is to create a program that achieves depth in many areas, while integrating those same areas together to form comprehensive skills set. Obtaining disciplinary adequacy in a variety of areas will better serve the student in training. Emphasis surrounding only one area, such as a Major in history, will neglect vital skills like critical reading and thought process, oral communication, sociology, and psychology, multicultural studies (Boix Mansilla, 2005).

Political Science

The perspective of political science is necessary in understanding the origins of 21^st Century law. A complete understanding regarding civil liberties, jurisprudence, and contemporary politics is a solid foundation for advanced studies (Abraham, 1998). Important cases and terminology can be studied successfully on the undergraduate level. This knowledge is then more readily applied to advanced matters when presented at the graduate level. A proficiency in the field of political science should not be optional. To say that a student entering law school without a background in political science is problematic would be an understatement.

Communication

Communication’s perspective is vital in that it remains the medium by which information is delivered in the field of law. An accomplished communicator maintains and controls parts such as: accuracy of message, emphasis on key information, and feedback from the audience (Thill, 2005). Central to any attorney’s success are their skills as a conversationalist, able to hold the interest of judges and juries alike while conveying facts significant to the case. Aptitude in the field of technical and practical communication should be reached well before a student applies for acceptance into our nations most renowned programs.

Psychology

The influence of psychology on the American judicial system is clear. These courses help lawyers to understand and deal with both clients and opponents. Psychological research has shown the importance of cognitive and moral reasoning in the decision making process. Possessing a deeper understanding on the inner workings of the mind is invaluable at forming arguments and persuasive speaking. These tools are also important in successful analysis and reasoning skills that are greatly valued by the law community (Tribler, 2006).

Supporting Evidence

The supporting evidence particular to the details of this paper will not come from subjective estimations or individual motivations. The primary sources will derive from peer-reviewed journals, scholarly texts, the American Bar Association, the Law School Admission Council, and information gathered from established law programs around the United States. Only after a thorough examination of the literature presented will any insights be affirmed. By assimilating recommendations from individual schools, the American Bar Association, and the Law School Admission Council, a well-informed conclusion can be achieved regarding the problems, origins, and resolutions concerning the issue of law school preparation.

Preparing for a challenging graduate program such as law school can be difficult without the proper undergraduate education. As a defense attorney assigned to a criminal case, it is almost comical to imagine showing up to court on the first day with a random collection of citations, arguments, and strategy of no relevancy to the facts at hand. To arrive for a first semester at a prestigious school of law, with a bachelor’s degree in Architecture, is sadly a very comparable analogy. By achieving disciplinary adequacy in political science, adding to it the skill set of a polished and confident communicator, along with the insights gained from the study of the varying philosophical worldviews of the judicial system, a student will arrive at law school far more prepared than his or her counterparts. The solution to this problem may not be the exact degree plan shown in the scope of this paper, but it will bring forward the more pertinent issue of the preparedness of upcoming law students.

A student of Law should be well versed in various areas. According to Huhn (2003), “Formalism, analogy, and realism are three modes of concrete operation that aid in the examination of law. None of the three modes of analysis standing alone is adequate to produce a clear, consistent, and just system. Legal progress depends upon using all three modes of analysis” (p. 48). Undergraduates have always been encouraged to study an assortment of courses and select from a broad range of majors. This philosophy is intended to create distinct students thereby forming a diverse student body. Rather than allowing only selected majors or having more accurate required coursework, students are accepted from any bachelor’s level field of study. Accepting a variety of students yet demanding a high uniform standard of knowledge simultaneously can become problematic in defining the proper preparation for the study of law.

Another part of the equation is the contradictory and confusing position of the American Bar Association regarding undergraduate coursework. The American Bar Association is the group responsible for setting academic standards, accreditation of lawyers, and setting moral codes for the law community at large. The ABA states (2008), “The American Bar Association does not recommend any undergraduate majors or group of courses to prepare for a legal education. Students are admitted to law school from almost every academic discipline”. Yet later the ABA goes on to state that, “A sound legal education will build upon and further refine the skills, values and knowledge that you already possess. The student who comes to law school lacking a broad range of basic skills and knowledge will face a difficult challenge” (www.abanet.org, n.d.). Any accomplished attorney knows that the intent of the law can be just as vital as the language of the law itself. If the intent of the ABA is to promote and aid students in becoming successful lawyers, then perhaps a more definite answer is in order. To say that an English major is just as prepared as a student graduating with a double major in communication and political science is misleading to say the least.

There are several groups affected by this lack of uniformity. First, the professors at the school must siphon valuable time away from their lectures to cover rudimentary concepts. Rather than being able to challenge students with problems that necessitate a basic knowledge of multiple disciplines, professors are forced to explain undergraduate concepts at the graduate level. If a student is unable to use advanced level communication skills to convey arguments and ideas, than of what benefit is that range of knowledge possessed. An instructor is only successful at presenting arduous lectures if their students have a sound framework of knowledge upon which to rely. Law schools should support the efforts of faculty who look to enhance their student’s non-analytical abilities. A legal education that excludes or suppresses the experience, knowledge, and adaptations of students risks incoherence and failure; learning to speak coherent sentences involves far more than merely learning the rules of grammar (Scorr, 2006).

Law is built upon precedents and assumptions. It is essential that each judge is familiar with and is able to grasp the concept of Stare Decisis, a Latin term referring to the practice of relying on previous decisions in current cases. If the legal system took an analogous approach in the nation’s law schools than they would suggest that each judge come from a hodgepodge of backgrounds, majors, and job experiences. Following this logic, would lead to the estimation that the more dissimilar our courts are, the healthier the judicial system will remain. On the contrary, it is the uniformity and predictable nature that is the strength of American law. Take for example, the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison(www.abanet.org, n.d.). Decided in 1803, it established the power of judicial review. Furthermore it recognized that a law must not violate the United States constitution, and that the Supreme Court has the final authority regarding the interpretation of the constitution. For more than two centuries the supremacy granted by Marbury v. Madison is as strong in the Supreme Court today as ever.

An ambiguous undergraduate curriculum not only concerns the teacher’s capacity to maintain a high standard of learning, but it increases the workload of the students. The level of diligence required throughout law school is immense to say the least. When an individual enters school lacking in areas such as communication, for example, then time that should be spent researching and analyzing is spent rehearsing their oral presentation. Tribler (2006) found that “Speech Communications requires the ability to collect and organize information, the ability to arrange that information quickly in an understandable form and, most of all, and the ability to think on your feet. You persuade your audience by knowing your audience and adapting your rhetorical strategies to their particular characteristics.” (p. 2). Speech communication and journalism skills are those that can be easily developed at an undergraduate level. There must a demarcation of sorts between competence that can and should be obtained at the undergraduate level, and those that are only achievable through the rigors of a graduate law program. A law student’s time is too important to be spent building secondary skills in addition to their primary coursework.

It should be noted that many students arrive at law school with many if not all the skills essential for success. The admissions process entails much more than verification of a bachelor’s degree. Included are letters of recommendation, extra curricular activities, and work history. These tools allow the admissions committee to predict those with an affinity for learning. Exceptions should include but are not limited to: a student with more than one undergraduate major, a student who has already obtained a graduate degree, a student with one undergraduate major but multiple additional minors. It is easy to conclude, however, that demanding a double major is less practical than developing a comprehensive single degree plan. According to DeGroff (2006), “Legal education is not an end in itself; it is meant, in general, to prepare students for law practice in some form. Thus assuming threshold rules of fairness in law school admissions, any argument for changing law school pedagogy must be rooted in some claim about the nature of law practice” (p. 536).

The advancement of pre law education is a significant concern that requires an interdisciplinary system of research. Using only single disciplinary perspectives provides inadequate insights into the complex origins and explanations necessary to answer the questions presented in the scope of this paper. According to Repko (2005), the Comprehensive Perspectives Model, emphasizes that multiple disciplines be used in a together in that case that the topic demands the utilization of an interdisciplinary system of investigation. In forming a comprehensive synthesis of multiple disciplines a more inclusive and educated solution can be formulated regarding the optimum preparation for law school.

To maintain continuity, a rational order of disciplinary insights into law must be present. Firstly, law is rooted in the understanding and history of the American judicial system. A solid grasp of terminology, cases, and theories are essential during law school; consequently insights from the field of political science will be employed. Secondly, persuasive speaking and argumentative writing are invaluable skills required of a successful attorney; therefore insights from communication are included. Finally, a working knowledge of the human thought process will give any law student an enormous advantage in working with clients and juries alike; for the purpose of drawing further insights, confirmation from the discipline of psychology will be necessary.

Expert Testimony from the Disciplinary Perspectives

In utilizing various disciplinary perspectives it is important to realize that each point of view carries its own inherent methods for dealing with the problem at hand. Each perspective requires a certain epistemology be followed when delineating between relevant factual content. Most methodology contains an expansive set of guiding insights that inevitably lead to a different set of conclusions from each perspective. Using multiple angles is beneficial in forming a comprehensive set of interdisciplinary insights.

Political Science

Stare Decisis: A central part of training for law school is the study of the model of “Stare Decisis,” a Latin phrase which when translated means to stand on previous decisions. Throughout a given group of cases there will undoubtedly be similar cases to be considered with analogous reasoning behind the verdict. Using the notion of case precedent it becomes easier to find and research arguments by referring to previous decisions. Without building on the foundation of precedent, the study of law becomes difficult, ambiguous, and erratic. It would be almost impossible to predict the outcome of a court case, thereby inhibiting the attorney’s ability to form a cohesive argument for their client.

Another important idea related to previous decisions is the predictability of law. More than any single legal opinion, law is based on the study of a body the entire body of decisions, and how they relate to each other. Legal precedent serves as a backbone upon which the future of law relies heavily. It is equally crucial to be taught not only which cases are applicable, but whether or not the case in question has any precedent at all. “Commentators disagree about almost every important question in this field, and especially the following: What does a case stand for as a matter of precedent? What theory, if any, should a judge adopt with respect to the proper weight to be accorded to a precedent or a line of precedent? What weight do the Justices in fact give to a precedent or line of precedent?” (Shapiro, 2008, p. 930). Sometimes it may appear comparable to another previously argued, but if the particulars surrounding the facts are not related then no precedent is pertinent to the case.

Civil liberties: In acquiring the skills required to become a successfully attorney a student of law must have a working knowledge of Civil Liberties in the United States. There is not another nation that has survived through such a tapestry of issues regarding civil rights. For hundreds of years there has existed a delicate balance between individual rights and the government’s duty to protect its citizens. “Every citizen has some area of their lives — whether it’s their behavior within their homes, whether it’s how to educate and discipline their children, whether it’s about how to run their business, their political thought, and their religious practices— where they want to be left alone” (Weigel, 2008, p. 34).

Additional factors such as social context and previous cases must be understood before a comprehensive picture of each issue can be drawn. An accomplished attorney will strive for landmark court decisions with a seemingly monumental result. However, these “landmark” cases rarely happen overnight. If an attorney understands the history and direction of civil liberties in America, then they can more accurately predict and argue future cases of their own.

Judicial process: The American judicial process is founded upon many different sides of jurisprudence. Much like qualifying a possibly employee based on an interview, another skill the law student most possess is the ability to identify the relevant schools of judicial thought in judge and jury alike. Identifying which school a particular judge or jury most closely follows gives an immense advantage to a potential attorney when constructing a claim. Some of the most prevalent schools of thought today include: natural, positive, historical, and sociological. Each school carries with it opinions and core beliefs greatly affecting their perception of law.

The first and most straightforward school of thought is natural law. Natural law challenges that laws come from a superior power and that those laws are immutable and unchangeable. These laws transcend culture, and do not alter simply because the body of law governing the land amends. It is a just code based on the idea that every person has a duty to abide by what is right and wrong based on their God given ethics.

In contrast, those whom are supporters of positive law believe in just the opposite. Law is not a question of right or wrong. Positivists hold valid that law comes from a sovereign leader, and those laws must be observed without uncertainty. Rather than lean on an ambiguous moral code, there are absolute standards based on the laws that govern whichever area a citizen resides. The question then becomes not if the act in question was morally right or wrong, but did the act violate the law of the land. Positive law tends to focus on the intent and purpose of the law, instead of the morality of the law.

Another school of thought is historical. As the name implies it is largely grounded in the history of political decisions. There is a great deal of emphasis placed on the outcome of previous cases rather than if those cases were justified. A judge is required to declare the laws put in place over the years without adding any outside opinions. Finally, the sociological point of view argues that because laws are in place for the benefit of society, that it is the society that should determine guilt or innocence. If the majority believes that an act was fully justified, than the punishment serves no purpose as a deterrent to future crimes. By punishing those that society supports, a further divide is created between the population and the system in place to protect them.

American constitutional law: There is no other governing body of legislation that has stood the test of time like the Constitution of the United States of America. Signed into effect over 200 years ago, it is a well known fact that it still serves today as the final authority in legal cases. The constitution is the supreme law of the land, overriding all other local, state, and federal regulations. The constitution has been expanded over the years to cover thousands of possible scenarios in the courtroom. All laws must line up with the constitution, and those that do not are deemed unconstitutional and considered void.

The fact that the American Constitution holds such a vast amount of influence necessitates careful consideration. “Moreover, in the Supremacy Clause, the document says that the Constitution, laws, and treaties shall be the ‘supreme Law of the Land,’ but makes no mention of Supreme Court decisions. It is clear that under the text of the Constitution the Supreme Court has no power to follow its own decisions when they conflict with the text. Moreover, the Supremacy Clause makes this Constitution the supreme law of the land, and this Constitution is the one that we know was submitted for ratification under Article VII” (Calabresi, 2008, p. 948)

Summary of political science insights: When considering the insights presented by the field of political science it is important to note several concepts vital to the continued success of a law student. Developing applicable knowledge regarding decisis, civil liberties, the judicial process, and constitutional law lays a foundation for successful learning at a more advanced level. While conflicts do exist within the judicial process, there is no indecision concerning the respect that contradictory views have for understanding the positives and negatives of each. However, it is not only adequacy in political science that better equips the student. Excellent communication training is inherently valuable in the practice of law.

Communication

Argumentative writing: To be successful in law school a student must be able to create a thorough convincing claim. This involves many steps that build towards poised and effective communication. “A key to teaching argumentation to students who are weak in this area is to provide explicit instruction about the role of evidence, how to develop a line of reasoning that supports a conclusion, and how to use factual information for that purpose. Students must also learn to search for the information that would assist them in developing their evidence. Another key is to provide feedback to students using criteria based on an established model of argumentation and emphasizing coherence of argument” (Gleason, 1999, p. 105).

Before any writing can be completed there must be meticulous examination of the facts involved in the topic. Only appropriate facts are central to your case and should be incorporated. Just as critical as the central idea of the argument, is the target audience that will be the focus. This necessitates the speaker posses polished interpersonal communication skills to read and understand each member of the audience. Another part of the argumentative writing process is communicating an unambiguous conclusion. In some cases the intention of the argument will be to persuade the audience to take a firm position. In other situations this is neither practical, nor possible, and the goal should be to shed a portion of doubt on a position that the jury holds to be true. It is clear that there are many skills involved in persuasive writing that will greatly benefit a student of law.

Analytical listening: Analytic listening involves more than just hearing words and processing them through the brain. It is a process of comprehension that involves the application of what is heard. “People spend 80% of their waking hours communicating. Of this time, 9% is writing, 16% is reading, 30% is speaking, and 45% is listening …Listening is proposed to be the most valued interpersonal skill” (Flynn, 2008, p. 143). Many parts of listening are pertinent to a student’s success in law school. It is essential to be able to interview possible jurors while listening for underlying beliefs that could be detrimental to a case. Critical listening can also aid in forming opposing arguments and cross examining witnesses. An attorney whom is able to effectively dissect their opponent’s statements accurately can quickly form rebuttals without delay.

Nonverbal communication: Sometimes more important as the messages that you are intentionally communicating verbally are the ones that you are unintentionally sending non verbally. Body posture, hand gestures, facial expressions, and even clothing are all constantly sending messages. A speaker could present a convincing and well prepared argument, but could fail because his posture contradicts his speech. “Previously, most explanations of human behavior in the workplace presumed that people were best persuaded by reason and logic. But now, that assumption is being challenged by researchers who have found that people are more likely to be convinced not by the content of the spoken word, but by the kinds of signals that business professionals often overlook—tone of voice and body language.” (Goman, 2008, p. 94) Any accomplished communicator realizes the value in sending congruent verbal and nonverbal messages. Visual presentation before any audience will be a strength or weakness, but rarely neutral.

Summary of communication insights: Communication cannot be overlooked when assimilating those skills necessary in preparation for law school. The addition of insights involving verbal and nonverbal communication, critical listening, and argumentative writing produce a powerful speaker far beyond one who is merely sufficient in political science alone. By combining a working understanding of political science and accomplished skills as an effective communicator, a student of law can prepare more readily for the advanced work involved as they progress in their learning. In addition to the ability to communicate to persons involved in the legal process, an understanding of that individual’s mental process is also necessary. Hence, psychology is another important discipline from which insights are included.

Psychology

Abnormal psychology: Abnormal psychology is concerned with studying anomalous human behaviors. This can be associated with the nature of abnormal behavior, cases, and treatments. Many patients are diagnoses with disorders that the scientific community has yet to fully understand. Research and experimental testing is done to illustrate, explain, and forecast abnormal examples that are found. “Over the past decade, substantial empirical evidence has been generated for hierarchical structures of mental disorders, particularly the mood and anxiety disorders” (Sellbom, 2008, p.576).

It is challenging when studying abnormal human behavior due to the difficulty in delineating between those behaviors which are considered common and those that are not. There are varying opinions throughout the medical population regarding the exact definition of an abnormal disorder. Generally speaking, abnormal is defined as having a distinct medical condition or deficiency. While being a criminal does not typically constitute abnormality, ongoing research continues to study the psychological factors of the criminal mind. Awareness of abnormal disorders is an invaluable part of any defense or prosecution moving into the 21st century.

Forensic psychology: Forensic psychology entails many parts of the legal process. First, forensic psychologists are responsible for clinical evaluations of defendants before and during courtroom proceedings. Many times they are required to compose legal reports that are viewed by judges or attorneys. They may even be required to give testimony during a trial about the psychological state of the person on trial. “There is urgency about forensic psychology which is fuelled by the professional necessity of being super competent and informed in case of challenge by the legal professions, the client or the offender…over the last decade, a number of new, unique areas requiring forensic evaluations and expert opinions have emerged and that the range of psycho-legal questions asked of forensic psychologists has expanded.” (Bates, 2007, p. 408)

The matters which the court deals with the forensic psychologist are questions of law, not psychology. Therefore, it is important that each forensic psychologist be extremely familiar and comfortable with legal terminology. “There is now a significant body of literature and guidelines for practice across a broad variety of forensic areas, both civil and criminal. Psychologists who are looking to expand their practice into forensic areas need to be aware of the distinctive competencies required and to obtain appropriate training and education regarding the legal issues addressed, the methodologies for assessment that have been developed, the special ethical issues that arise in the forensic context, and the skills of forensic report writing and testimony.” (Packer, 2008, p. 245)

In the same way an expert of the law would be well served had they an adequate knowledge of forensic psychology. Part of being a successful attorney requires an understanding in depth of all the players that are involved in a courtroom. A great is deal is of time is spent in law school studying judges and legal procedure. However, as a potentially crucial witness, a forensic psychology should be studied at some level by the person that intends to question them.

Summary of psychology insights: It is clear that the study of abnormal, forensic, and cognitive psychology is strongly tied to the legal process. More so than simply understanding the legal factors involved in a case, forming a framework of the individuals involved is also essential. Each person uses a different cognitive framework that affects their logical reasoning. Without an understanding of the individual and the complex mental processes that govern that individuals mind it would be difficult to construct an argument designed to target that individual. While communication and psychology each reveal different helpful insights into this complex problem, political science remains the foundation of all legal studies. Political science should remain a central focus to any undergraduate work, without neglecting the addition of effective communication skills and multiple psychological perspectives.

Integration

As stated previously the topic of law school preparation is a complex issue requiring the integration of many disciplinary perspectives. To provide valuable insights complex research and analysis from the fields of political science, communication, and psychology have been included. In addition to the independent disciplinary specific research necessary, an interdisciplinary integration assists in forming a cohesive and beneficial solution to the problem of law school preparation. Using an interdisciplinary approach is the only way to resolve this complicated and multifaceted issue.

Comparison of disciplines

It is important to note that while each discipline carries with it unique theories and epistemology, they are all interrelated in many ways. By dissecting each discipline inferences can be made regarding concurring and dissenting opinions alike. By identifying the sources of the conflicts and consensus between the disciplines a more detailed conclusion will be drawn utilizing varied perspectives.

Political science and communication: The disciplines of political science and communication are closely tied. Each holds central principles of accurate, analytical, and effective language. Though hardly any of communication studies focuses specifically on political science, all of political science revolves around the interpretation and accuracy of communication. Without a well balanced articulation of a topic or idea it would be quite difficult to communicate important political ideas between different parties. Communication recognizes that politically correct speech is more valuable today than ever before. With many working in a complex global community, knowledge of policies and politics is invaluable with communicating across cultural boundaries.

Where the two differ is in their epistemology. Political Science places a great deal on historical documents, figures, and decisions. While communication studies are always evolving to suit the speaker, audience, and an ever changing culture. The focus of learning communication in the 21^st century and beyond is in speaking effectively and correctly to an increasingly multicultural society. Political science is largely concerned with the laws, history, and behaviors of that specific territory or region, in this case theUnited States.

Political science and psychology: When comparing and contrasting the disciplines of political science and psychology it is important to realize that the difference lies in their methods. Political science draws its methods largely from precedent and interpretation as previously discussed. Contrast that with psychology, in which the central focus remains controlled testing and experimentation. Psychology’s nature as a science strongly connects it to the scientific method, theories, and new discoveries. While political science does not lean so heavily on science, it contains within its discipline theories and hypothesis on judicial process. Political Science deals largely with theory and practice, something psychologists can easily relate to. Specifically the field of forensic psychology as mentioned earlier is not a distinct sub discipline in itself, but rather a blend of psychology and political science.

Communication and psychology: Finally the disciplines of communication and psychology are thoroughly examined for any conflicts or concurring statements. Communication falls under the category of the arts, and psychology remains grounded in the sciences. While the arts and sciences rarely seem to agree, some congruence’s are readily apparent. Communication and psychology are inexorably tied to technological advancements. As our society continues to advance technologically, communication must adapt itself to different methods and mediums of speech. Psychology as well relies on new discoveries made easier by computers and processing equipment, as well as new advances in the fields of neurology and understanding the brain and thought processes.

As more is understood about the way people think and act, the field of communication will no doubt change to fit the new modes of operation found in the human brain by psychologists. The main conflict between the two disciplines is best described as the creative arts against the proven sciences. There are many entrenched theories deep within communication studies that will continue to contradict findings in the scientific community. Because communication is still considered to be an art form by many, and science by only a few, most will continue to dismiss proven studies in favor of time honored techniques for writing, listening, and speaking.

Integration methods

In order to be considered true interdisciplinary work there must be a purpose achieved through the integration of multiple disciplinary perspectives. Boix Mansilla states (2005), that valid interdisciplinary studies will outline a new policy, create a cognitive advancement, or put into effect a type of force or leverage. There must be an interdisciplinary understanding reached through the conclusion that could not be accomplished by a single disciplinary view. This understanding is apparent, thorough, and well formed in recommending a solution to the problem at hand. In accomplishing the goal of interdisciplinary studies there are five distinct methods that can be used. These methods are extension, expansion, redefinition, transformation, and reorganization. (Repko, 2005).

By establishing a logical order of disciplines, combined with numerous techniques of interdisciplinary integration, an entirely new explanation can attempt to be formed. The first technique is extension. Extension takes inherent conflict and comparisons between disciplinary subjects and extends them into other areas. The second technique is expansion, which takes existing concepts and expands them across other disciplinary boundaries. The third technique used is redefinition. Redefinition involves reformulating and synthesizing disciplinary concepts and terminology together so that they can be applied to multiple disciplinary perspectives. Transformation is the next integration technique, and involves using contradictory themes to find universal basis for combining insights. The final technique is reorganization. Reorganization works to take the central holdings close to a discipline and to create new relationships and definitions around the issue.

Integrative solution

Disciplines necessary for law school: The first part of reaching an integrative solution is to take the insights from the various disciplines and form a core group of disciplines that would be necessary for a successful law student. While there are many disciplines that are helpful the most essential according to the scope of this paper are political science, communication, and psychology. A student of law must posses not only one strength, but multiple strengths, just as law school teaches not one class, but multiple classes in a variety of different areas. Psychological research has shown the importance of cognitive and moral reasoning in the decision making process. Possessing a deeper understanding on the inner workings of the mind is invaluable at forming arguments and persuasive speaking. These tools are also important in successful analysis and reasoning skills that are greatly valued by the law community.

A complete understanding regarding civil liberties, jurisprudence, and contemporary politics is a solid foundation for advanced studies. Important cases and terminology can be studied successfully on the undergraduate level. This knowledge is then more readily applied to advanced matters when presented at the graduate level. A proficiency in the field of political science should not be optional. An accomplished communicator maintains and controls their message which is a vital skill to any law student. Central to any attorney’s success are their skills as a conversationalist, able to hold the interest of judges and juries alike while conveying facts significant to the case. Aptitude in the field of technical and practical communication should be reached well before a student applies for acceptance into our nations most renowned programs.

Forming a degree plan: After resolving conflicts and finalizing the disciplines inherent in a law degree the next step would be to form a rough degree plan from the insights. This degree plan would not differ as to the core curriculum that is found in most degree plans. Forty to fifty hours comprised of alternate studies such as English, science, humanities, history, and the arts in addition to advanced undergraduate curriculum is essential. Forming a well rounded individual in addition to reaching disciplinary adequacy in specific areas should be a balanced focus of any bachelor’s degree plan.

After the freshmen and sophomore core has been completed, the student will move on into basic communication, psychology, and political science studies. The beneficial part about combining these studies together is that they lend experience to the other. Political science research, papers, and oral arguments will come easier having taken communication studies. When dissecting communication as an art form, understanding cognitive thought process through psychology will help the student to effectively plan his communication accordingly.

While there is no exact number of hours necessary to achieve adequacy in these three disciplines, it is recommended to take at least 12 hours in each one, 6 of those being at the advanced level. At this point the student will have taken around fifty hours of core classes, and thirty six hours of the pre-law core. It is also very important to allow for diversity in the degree plan. Even after the required courses, each student would still have more than thirty hours to be used at their own leisure. While registration would require approval by a pre-law advisor, each individual could still take specific classes of their choosing. These subjects can be, but are not limited too: the arts, business, literature, philosophy, and history.

Conclusion

It is apparent throughout the research and scope of this paper that there is a problem with formal collegiate training that precedes law school. This problem causes difficulties for the students and teachers alike, as they struggle to reach a common ground with each other moving forward in the learning process. However, by gaining those essential skills necessary for a student of law during an undergraduate degree plan, a student can be much better prepared for the difficult task which is ahead of them.

References

Introduction

Political Science

Abraham, H. (1998) the judicial process. New York:Oxford.

Communication

Thill, J., Bove, C. (2005) Excellence in business communication. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Psychology

Tribler, W. (2006). The defense philosophy. IDC Quarterly, 16(3), 1-2.

Additional Sources

Boix Mansilla, V. (2005). Assessing student work at interdisciplinary crossroads. Change, 37(1), 14-21.

Repko, A. (2005) Interdisciplinary practice: A student guide to research and writing.Boston: Pearson.

Background

Huhn, Wilson R. (2003) stages of legal reasoning: formation, analogy, and realism. Villanova law review, 305. P

Pre Law Committee of the ABA. (2008) Preparing for law school. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from the American Bar Association Web site: http://www.abanet.org/legaled/prelaw/ prep.html

Scorr, K. (2006) Non-Analytical thinking in law practices: blinking in the forest. Clinical Law Review, (2), 687-696. P

DeGroff, E., & McKee, K. (2006). Learning like lawyers: Addressing the differences in law student learning styles. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal. 536-549. P

Repko, A. (2005) Interdisciplinary practice: A student guide to research and writing.Boston: Pearson.

Disciplinary Insights

Political Science

Shapiro, D. (2008, April). The Role of Precedent in Constitutional Adjudication: An Introspection. Texas Law Review, pp. 929,957. Retrieved November 13, 2008, from Academic Search Complete database. P

Weigel, D. (2008, November). Bob Barr Talks. Reason, 40(6), 26-34. Retrieved November 13, 2008, from Academic Search Complete database. P

Calabresi, S. (2008). Text vs. precedent in constitutional law. . (pp. 947-959). Harvard Law School Journals. Retrieved November 13, 2008, from Academic Search Complete database. P

Communication

Gleason, M. (1999, January). The role of evidence in constitutional writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(1), 81-106. Retrieved November 13, 2008, doi:10.1080/105735699278305 P

Flynn, J., Valikoski, T., & Grau, J. (2008, August). Listening in the Business Context: Reviewing the State of Research. International Journal of Listening, 22(2), 141-151. Retrieved November 13, 2008, from Academic Search Complete database. P

Goman C. (2008). Watch Your Language. T+D [serial online]. August 2008;62(8):94-95. Available from: Academic Search Complete,Ipswich,MA. Accessed November 13, 2008.

Psychology

Sellbom, M., Ben-porath, Y., & Bagby, R. (2008, August). On the Hierarchical Structure of Mood and Anxiety Disorders: Confirmatory Evidence and Elaboration of a Model of Temperament Markers. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117(3), 576-590. Retrieved November 13, 2008, doi:10.1037/a0012536 P

Bates-Gaston, J. (2007, September). Forensic psychology—emerging topics and expanding roles. Goldstein, A. (Ed.). (2007). John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-47-1714070. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 17(5), 408-410. Retrieved November 13, 2008, doi:10.1002/casp.926 P

Packer, I.(2008, April). Specialized Practice in Forensic Psychology: Opportunities and Obstacles. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 39(2), 245-249. Retrieved November 13, 2008, doi:10.1037/0735-7028.39.2.245 P

Integration

Boix Mansilla, V. (2005). Assessing student work at disciplinary crossroads. Change, 37(1), 14-21.

Repko, A. (2005). Interdisciplinary practice: A student guide to research and writing.Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.

Brown, K. (2008) Disciplinary concurring and dissenting opinions [Table 1].

Brown, K. (2008) Integrative solution review [Table 2].

Table 1

Disciplinary Concurring and Dissenting Opinions (Brown, 2008)

Disciplines	Concurring	Dissenting
Political Science and Communication	Accurate, analytical, and effective language and knowledge of policies and politics is invaluable with communicating across cultural boundaries.	Laws, history, and behaviors of a specific territory or region, mainly absolute precedent and changing practices.
Political Science and Psychology	Philosophy and individual thoughts play an intricate role in cognitive thinking and the judicial process.	Methods and experimentation in reaching conclusions about behaviors, groups, and actions in history.
Communication and Psychology	Understanding speech and the way members of a society communicate is central.	Accepted theories and testing of valued practices within disciplinary boundaries.