I think the emphasis on money as the next form of competition is a bit misplaced and not quite the issue the article was describing. Money becomes used because it is easy to compare and does have some tangible benefits, but in the absence of real differences in money law students and lawyers would still try to find ways to distinguish their success. Pretty much all big firms pay the same to associates, but there is still competition to work at the "elite" firms. Journals, clerkships, and nonfirm jobs, based on my impressions, also seem to be subject to competition based on perceptions of prestige rather than the skills they provide and what sort of fit they are for an individual.

The point I disagree with the authors of the article about is that this is necessarily unique to law school and the legal profession. Other professional schools, like medical school and business school, do seem to mitigate this by having more of an emphasis on teamwork. Perhaps this is an area where law school can better emulate these schools by changing the structure of the class to put more of an emphasis on collaborative learning. But med and business students still compete for the most prestigious and highest paying jobs and residencies and fellowships, often in conflict with what they feel is the best fit or what makes them most fulfilled.

I think that reflects a more fundamental social issue, which is that the professionals of our society have been brought up being taught to tie self-esteem to "achievement". From elementary school on, every year brings its grades and tests, praise for good numbers or letters, disapproval for bad ones. Most parents of professionals put pressure on them to get into and attend the "good" schools, sometimes in particularly ridiculous situations like NYC as early as elementary or middle school, and this continues with jobs and even other facets of life, like what neighborhood someone chooses to live in or the performance of their own children in the same absurd system. Professionals generally thrive in this system to get where they are and therefore tend to create an even further entanglement between achievement and self-esteem. While university and professional students may need life guidance the most urgently, it might also be too late at that point. What we are really in need of is an overhaul of our education system from the Prussian model of creating obedient industrial workers to one to create happier and more creative citizens.

It's unfortunate that most of the emphasis on education reform instead is focused on how to expand this structure to encompass the teachers as well instead of trying to eliminate it. Part of the problem might be the political influence of industry, which needs skilled and anxious workers a lot more than it needs creative and active citizens, but I think the bigger problem is that most parents would rather see the continuation of this system. They were brought up with the system and often to them the "success" of their children adds to their own success and consequently self-esteem, not to mention the inherent resistance to changing traditions. I'm not sure how one would go about trying to persuade the public of the need for change, but maybe a start would be reminding the world that neither the education system nor law school are in Lake Wobegon.

-- DanielKetani - 18 Apr 2012