Legal
training
has
long
followed
a
guild
system:
law
schools
teach
doctrine,
then
new
lawyers
learn
to
practice
by
working
alongside
experienced
attorneys.
This
apprenticeship
model
may
have
worked
well
decades
ago,
but
it’s
increasingly
problematic
today.
And
it
particularly
doesn’t
work
well
when
it
comes
to
GenAI
since
all
too
often
younger
lawyers
know
more
about
the
tools
than
more
experienced
lawyers.
But
they
lack
the
experience
and
critical
thinking
skills
to
use
them
effectively
in
the
practice,
as
I
have
discussed.
That
leaves
a
significant
knowledge
and
training
gap.
The
Cleveland
State-AltaClaro
Announcement
Which
is
why
a
recent
joint
announcement
by
Cleveland
State
University
Law
School
and
AltaClaro
—
an
online,
hands-on
legal
training
provider
—
is
significant.
Together,
they
are
now
offering
a
course
to
law
students
at
CSU
entitled
Fundamentals
of
Prompt
Engineering
for
Lawyers.
According
to
the
press
release
announcing
the
course,
it
will
be
offered
as
an
extracurricular
program
to
CSU
law
students
and
will
run
three
times
during
the
academic
year.
Reflecting
the
desire
and
interest
in
such
a
course,
within
the
first
week
of
the
announcement,
over
130
students
signed
up,
according
to
the
release.
As
stated
in
the
press
release,
“The
curriculum
focuses
on
practical
techniques
for
working
with
generative
AI
tools,
understanding
AI’s
limitations
in
legal
practice,
and
embedding
verification
and
professional
judgment
into
AI-assisted
legal
workflows.”
Students
who
complete
the
course
will
receive
a
certificate
that
they
can
use
on
their
resumes
and
on
social
media.
Recognizing
the
need
for
such
a
class,
Brian
Ray,
Co-Interim
Dean
at
CSU
College
of
Law,
is
quoted
in
the
release:
“Providing
this
course
to
our
students
represents
the
cornerstone
of
a
broader
strategy
to
integrate
responsible
and
effective
generative
AI
training
into
our
legal
education
curriculum.
Our
goal
is
for
employers
to
know
that
CSU|LAW
graduates
are
entering
the
profession
prepared
to
use
these
powerful
tools
thoughtfully,
ethically,
and
competently.”
AltaClaro’s
Approach
AltaClaro
and
its
training
programs
are
unique
in
many
ways.
They
combine
the
need
to
learn
from
life-like
simulations
with
feedback
from
experienced
attorneys
skilled
at
training.
AltaClaro’s
courses
adopt
a
three-step
approach:
providing
the
foundational
knowledge,
hands-on
practice
sessions
and
then,
perhaps
most
importantly,
an
interactive
review
with
the
experts
and
each
other.
The
instructors
are
carefully
vetted
before
they
are
selected.
They
must
be
currently
practicing
and
have
practiced
for
10
years
with
an
Am
Law
100
firm.
They
are
put
through
a
mock
training
session
and
must
get
high
ratings
from
the
participants
to
qualify.
But
that’s
not
the
only
thing
unique
about
what
AltaClaro
is
doing.
In
addition
to
its
regular
training
programs
for
young
lawyers,
it
has
gone
all
in
with
training
on
how
to
use
and
not
to
use
GenAI
tools.
As
I
have
discussed
before,
it
is
just
this
sort
of
training
that
is
so
needed
as
the
profession
confronts
the
brave
new
GenAI
world
where
younger
lawyers
know
the
tools
but
not
necessarily
how
to
use
them
effectively.
And
older
lawyers
know
how
to
practice
but
often
little
about
these
potentially
transformative
tools.
It’s
a
problematic
gap
generally
but
particularly
one
when
your
training
program
is
based
on
an
outmoded
catch-as-catch-can
guild
system.
The
danger
is
you
end
up
with
young
lawyers
using
the
tool
without
employing
critical
thinking
and
get
results
that
look
and
sound
good,
but
which
really
aren’t.
Closing
the
Gap
Recognizing
this
very
gap,
AltaClaro
offers
three
different
courses,
prompt
engineering
for
lawyers,
prompt
engineering
for
legal
professionals,
and
a
GenAI
supervisory
course
for
partners,
according
to
its
website.
I
wrote
about
AltaClaro
back
in
2023
when
it
first
announced
its
prompt
engineering
training
program
for
law
firms.
At
the
time
and
perhaps
even
today,
the
program
is
unique
in
that
it
combines
not
only
instruction
but
hands-on
training
and
feedback,
which
is
sorely
needed
to
master
GenAI.
I
wrote
about
AltaClaro
again
in
2024
when
it
announced
its
GenAI
program
for
supervising
partners.
Once
again,
the
program
was
unique
in
that
it
targeted
more
experienced
lawyers
to
help
them
oversee
those
in
their
teams
who
are
no
doubt
using
GenAI
tools.
The
program
was
developed
in
conjunction
with
the
law
firm
K&L
Gates.
At
the
time,
I
noted
how
rare
it
was
for
law
firms
to
recognize
the
need
to
train
their
partners
how
to
supervise
and
lead
teams
not
just
in
the
use
of
GenAI
but
generally.
With
the
Cleveland
State
announcement,
AltaClaro
is
at
it
again,
this
time
at
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum:
helping
law
students
master
GenAI
skills
before
they
get
out
in
the
real
world.
It’s
important
because
it
will
give
students
an
advantage
in
a
job
market
where
firms
are
actively
looking
for
young
lawyers
who
know
something
about
how
to
actually
use
the
tools.
If
nothing
else,
it
saves
them
training
time.
And
in
many
firms,
supervising
lawyers
may
not
have
a
clue
themselves
and
certainly
have
no
formal
training
programs.
That
leaves
it
to
younger
lawyers
to
figure
it
out
as
they
go.
That’s
not
healthy,
and
as
we
have
seen
from
all
the
citations
to
nonexistent
cases
or
those
which
contain
inaccuracies,
downright
dangerous.
So,
it
makes
absolute
sense
to
offer
such
a
program.
Some
Questions
As
expected,
the
initiative
raises
important
questions
about
implementation,
scope,
and
potential
unintended
consequences.
First
and
foremost,
there’s
a
commitment
question
since
the
course
is
an
extracurricular
one.
Given
the
potential
fundamental
impact
of
GenAI,
shouldn’t
it
be
a
mandatory,
for-credit
course
instead
of
just
optional?
The
optional
status
suggests
that
GenAI
competency
is
a
nice-to-have
rather
than
essential.
That’s
a
problem
when
ethical
rules
require
GenAI
competency.
And
will
the
course
be
long
enough
to
impart
the
kind
of
skill
and
knowledge
needed?
Moreover,
effective
use
of
GenAI
skills
requires
critical
thinking
skills,
as
I
have
discussed.
Will
the
course
help
students
develop
these
skills?
Will
it
teach
students
to
think
like
lawyers
and
not
just
like
an
LLM?
And
there
is
the
reliance
factor.
Firms
may
see
the
certificate
and
think
the
holder
knows
all
there
is
to
know
about
GenAI
and
conclude
no
further
training
is
necessary.
It’s
already
bad
enough
when
older
lawyers
presume
that
just
because
a
lawyer
is
younger,
they
somehow
have
all
the
tech
skills
needed.
Now
firms
can
point
to
someone
with
an
honest
to
goodness
certificate
confirming
that
misplaced
assumption.
A
Start
But
given
all
that,
the
course
is
a
start.
It’s
a
recognition
on
the
part
of
the
law
school
of
the
need
for
training
in
a
tremendously
important
area
that,
for
better
or
worse,
is
remaking
the
profession.
CSU
is
joining
a
group
of
law
schools
like
Vanderbilt,
Suffolk,
and
others
who
recognize
their
responsibility
to
students
and,
for
that
matter,
to
the
profession
to
deal
with
the
realities
of
GenAI
in
a
systematic
way.
As
for
AltaClaro,
I
have
never
taken
one
of
their
courses
and
can’t
vouch
for
how
good
they
are.
But
the
concept
is
sound:
training
by
doing
and
using
experts
not
only
to
talk
but
to
show
and
guide
in
actual
simulations.
As
cofounder
Abdi
Shayesteh,
once
told
me,
“You
can’t
learn
to
swim
by
watching
videos.”
AltaClaro’s
approach
to
legal
training
is
refreshing
and
its
recognition
of
the
need
for
GenAI
training
is
not
only
noteworthy,
but
also
of
critical
importance.
GenAI
is
not
going
away
and,
as
we
see
over
and
over
as
courts
sanction
lawyers
for
inappropriate
use,
understanding
it
and
how
to
use
it
are
fundamental
to
today’s
practice.
The
time
has
come
for
systematic
GenAI
training
in
law
schools.
The
question
isn’t
whether
law
schools
should
offer
these
courses,
it’s
whether
they
can
afford
to
not
only
offer
them
but
to
make
them
mandatory.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law.