本文選題：法律診所 + 教育方式��； 參考：《中國政法大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 法律診所教育是一種側(cè)重實(shí)踐性、非傳統(tǒng)的法學(xué)教育方法,近年在我國的各大法學(xué)院嶄露頭角,并建立起形式多樣的法律診所,得到了學(xué)校、學(xué)生、律師的多方好評(píng),但診所教育畢竟是一個(gè)新興的“舶來品”,仍然存在許多問題亟待解決,故本文從學(xué)習(xí)借鑒的角度出發(fā)全方位地解讀美國法律診所教育的成功案例。文章第一部分對(duì)法律診所做了一個(gè)概念性地介紹,著重分析了它與其他傳統(tǒng)法律教育形式的差別特點(diǎn)。第二部分將法律診所在美國的發(fā)展歷程分為三個(gè)階段:“案例法”的興起;“案例法”的沒落與“法律診所”呼之欲出;“法律診所”應(yīng)運(yùn)而生,并以耶魯?shù)让绹▽W(xué)院的實(shí)際案例分別展示了法律診所的壯大過程。文章在第三部分以美國各大法學(xué)院官方網(wǎng)站的公布數(shù)據(jù)為基本資料加以其他的信息輔助,總結(jié)分析了美國診所教育的現(xiàn)狀:法律診所在各法學(xué)院的實(shí)際分布狀況、診所設(shè)置涵蓋范圍、其教育目的及所獲成果、主要課程教學(xué)方法、診所師資及待遇、診所對(duì)學(xué)生的要求、診所課程評(píng)價(jià)方式等,在本環(huán)節(jié)文章公布了一些分析數(shù)據(jù)以期達(dá)到一個(gè)更為直觀的了解,通過這部分的研究可以對(duì)美國診所教育有了一個(gè)全貌的掌握。本文的第四部分主要以比較研究的方法分析了我國診所教育的發(fā)展?fàn)顟B(tài)及困境,將問題集中在以下幾個(gè)方面:教育背景的差異導(dǎo)致診所教育在我國的“形式化”;實(shí)際國情導(dǎo)致的師資短缺;診所覆蓋范圍狹窄,案件來源不穩(wěn)定;診所運(yùn)營的經(jīng)費(fèi)不足;參與診所的學(xué)生從業(yè)身份認(rèn)證困難等,本文針對(duì)之前提出的問題,在借鑒美國成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上充分考慮我國實(shí)際條件提出了可行對(duì)策:確定診所專職教師,提高律師等實(shí)務(wù)法律人的參與度以達(dá)到師資的多元化發(fā)展;開源節(jié)流,拓寬診所運(yùn)營經(jīng)費(fèi)來源;取得法律服務(wù)主管機(jī)關(guān)司法行政部門的支持,加強(qiáng)與政府法律援助機(jī)構(gòu)的合作以穩(wěn)定案件來源等等。
[Abstract]:Law clinic education is a practical, non-traditional method of law education. In recent years, it has emerged in various law schools in our country, and has established various kinds of law clinics, which have been well received by schools, students and lawyers. But the clinic education is a new "import" after all, and there are still many problems to be solved. Therefore, this paper interprets the successful cases of American law clinic education from the angle of learning and drawing lessons from all directions. In the first part, the author introduces the law clinic in a conceptual way, and analyzes the difference between the law clinic and other traditional legal education forms. The second part divides the development of legal clinic in America into three stages: the rise of "case law", the decline of "case law" and the coming out of "law clinic", and the emergence of "law clinic". The actual cases of Yale and other famous American law schools demonstrate the growing process of the law clinic. In the third part, taking the published data from the official website of the major American law schools as the basic information, the author summarizes and analyzes the current situation of clinic education in the United States: the actual distribution of the law clinics in each law school. The scope of setting up clinics, their educational aims and achievements, the teaching methods of main courses, the teachers and treatment of clinics, the requirements of clinics for students, the evaluation methods of clinical courses, etc. In this paper, some analysis data are published in order to achieve a more intuitive understanding, through this part of the study can have a complete picture of the United States clinic education. In the fourth part of this paper, the author analyzes the status and difficulties of clinic education in China by means of comparative research, and focuses on the following aspects: the difference of educational background leads to the "formalization" of clinic education in China; The shortage of teachers caused by the actual national conditions; the narrow coverage of the clinic, the unstable source of cases, the lack of funds for the operation of the clinic, the difficulty in the identification of students participating in the clinic, and so on. On the basis of drawing lessons from the successful experience of the United States, this paper puts forward some feasible countermeasures: to determine the full-time clinical teachers, to increase the participation of lawyers and other practical legal personnel in order to achieve the pluralistic development of teachers, to increase the income and reduce the expenditure, Broadening the funding sources of clinic operation, obtaining the support of the judicial administrative department of the legal service authority, strengthening the cooperation with the legal aid agency of the government to stabilize the source of the case and so on.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D90-4

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 劉劍;;診所式法學(xué)教育:現(xiàn)實(shí)主義法學(xué)對(duì)法學(xué)教育的貢獻(xiàn)[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年35期

2 林海容;;美國診所式法律教育及其啟示[J];工會(huì)論壇(山東省工會(huì)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2012年05期

3 李正新;;試論法學(xué)教育的“臨床”培養(yǎng)——診所法律教育本土化困境及其應(yīng)對(duì)[J];中國大學(xué)生就業(yè);2012年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王娟娟;診所式法律教育的本土化模式研究[D];河北科技大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1830962