10%.
That percentage – or less – is the rough proportion of the mediation curriculum devoted to mediation representation in US law schools, including about:
- 6% of mediation clinic courses
- 9% of mediation simulation courses
- 3-9% of the coverage in some mediation textbooks
- 7% of the coverage in many mediation courses
Is it too much to devote 90% of our mediation instruction to the role of mediators – especially considering that new graduates represent clients in mediation much more frequently than they mediate?
I think so. I explain why in Law Schools Should Substantially Increase Instruction in Mediation Representation.
For one thing, parties in mediation usually need professional advice to evaluate their cases and develop strategies, which mediators cannot provide in depth or at all. This is precisely the important service that attorneys can provide. But we teach students very little about what to do when they represent clients in mediation.
Although we generally treat neutral and representative perspectives as if they are diametrically opposed, both roles share basic values and both involve similar skills of good listening, identifying interests, educating clients, and considering alternatives.
The article provides suggestions for faculty teaching mediation. In particular, it suggests that we provide better balanced instruction, incorporating training both as a neutral and representative throughout mediation courses, starting from the beginning of the semester.
I will discuss this article and invite feedback at the AALS ADR Section WIP conference at McGeorge in my presentation on October 18.
Take a look.
