Curricular Structures at the NLUs

The following extract appears at pp. 57-62 of a report titled 'Suggestions for Reforms at the National Law Universities set up through State Legislations' which was submitted to the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India in March 2018. It was based on surveys conducted among faculty members (33 respondents) and students (849 respondents) at 15 participating institutions in August-September 2016. I was one of the authors of this report. We welcome any feedback. 

The full text can be downloaded here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3171842.

Curricular Structures at the NLUs

The discussion on the quality of teaching is intertwined with debates about the curricular structure that is followed at the various National Law Universities (NLUs). A moot point is whether it makes sense to prescribe a uniform curricular structure in a country as vast and diverse as India. While the Bar Council of India’s Rules on Legal Education (2008) stipulate a demarcation between ‘compulsory’ and ‘optional’ courses, more nuanced deliberations are needed to work out a pragmatic balance for each institution while bearing in mind local specificities and availability of teachers. Given that the NLUs enjoy a certain degree of academic autonomy that is not available to departments and colleges that are part of larger public universities, it is worthwhile to briefly sketch how this autonomy has been used in relation to curriculum design.

If we take the five-year integrated B.A., LL.B. programme as a representative example, there are two models prevailing at the moment. NLSIU Bangalore and NLIU Bhopal are following a ‘trimester’ model, wherein each academic year is broken into three equivalent terms of nearly 13 weeks each. During each term, students ordinarily complete 4 courses, implying that the programme as a whole requires the completion of 60 courses over a duration of five years. All the other NLUs are following the ‘semester’ model, wherein each academic year is broken into two equivalent terms of 17-18 weeks each. Students ordinarily complete 5 courses in each semester, implying that the programme as a whole requires the completion of 50 courses over a duration of five years. The courses delivered to the students are usually divided into:-

(i) ‘Compulsory’ subjects as prescribed under the BCI Rules on Legal Education, 2008. Most of these are taught courses which are assessed through written examinations, project assignments and presentations made by students. This list also includes ‘Clinical’ courses which are practice-oriented and entail students honing their skills through simulated activities.

(ii) ‘Optional’ subjects that can be further sub-classified as:-

(a) ‘Elective’ courses (taught courses substantially assessed through written examinations);

(b) ‘Seminar’ courses (discussion-based courses assessed through research papers);

Table VI: List of compulsory subjects prescribed for completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Law (LL.B.) under BCI Rules on Legal Education, 2008 (Schedule II)

1. Jurisprudence (Legal Methods, Indian Legal System and Basic Theories of Law)	14. Administrative Law
2. Law of Contracts I - General Principles	15. Company Law
3. Law of Contracts II - Special Contracts	16. Public International Law
4. Law of Torts (including Motor Vehicles Act and Consumer Protection Act)	17. Principles of Taxation Law
5. Family Law I – Marriage and Divorce	18. Environmental Law
6. Family Law II – Inheritance and Succession	19. Labour Law I
7. Criminal Law I – Indian Penal Code and Offences under other Legislations	20. Labour Law II
8. Criminal Law II – Criminal Procedure Code	Clinical Courses
9. Constitutional Law I – Structures of Governance (Federalism, Separation of Powers)	21. Drafting of Pleadings and Conveyancing
10. Constitutional Law II – Adjudication and Enforcement of Fundamental Rights	22. Professional Ethics and Professional Accounting Systems
11. Property Law	23. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
12. Law of Evidence	24. Moot Court Exercises & Internships
13. Civil Procedure Code and Limitation Act

Among the other subjects that are prescribed for the five-year integrated B.A., LL.B. programme, students are required to complete foundational courses in disciplines such as History, Economics, Political Science, Sociology and English. The usual pattern is that the first course in each of these disciplines introduces the architecture of knowledge in the respective field while the second course emphasizes the linkages between that discipline and the formal study of law. At most of the NLUs, the subjects that introduce these disciplines are interspersed with law subjects during the first two years of undergraduate studies. Some of them also offer integrated programmes such as B.B.A., LL.B., B.Com., LL.B. and B.Sc., LL.B. that include courses devoted to business administration, commerce and science subjects respectively. While the inclusion of these courses was intended to create an interdisciplinary orientation among faculty members and students, there are some pointed concerns about the actualisation of this objective. They range from the marginalisation of teachers engaged for these disciplines especially when it comes to academic decision-making to the relative indifference of students who often fail to grasp the importance of interdisciplinary learning.

The BCI Rules on Legal Education, 2008 also contain a suggestive list of optional subjects that can be taught to construct thematic specializations in ‘Constitutional Law’, ‘Business Law’, ‘International Trade Law’, ‘Criminal Law’, ‘International Law, ‘Law and Agriculture’ and ‘Intellectual Property Law’ among other sub-fields,. Institutions have been given the autonomy to initiate specializations in areas that have not been enumerated. The actual breadth of optional courses offered and delivered at each institution depends on the availability of teachers and requisite resources. The prevailing wisdom is that giving students more flexibility in coursework will enable them to better align academic pursuits with their interests and subsequent career objectives. Providing such flexibility during the later years of the undergraduate programme may help in addressing the problem of student apathy which becomes quite evident by that stage. Another reason for such diversification is that it enables faculty members to design and deliver courses that better reflect their distinctive research interests. This would ensure that students can directly benefit from the research expertise of the faculty members.

However, there is also a competing concern that too much flexibility during undergraduate programmes will limit the students’ exposure to the various sub-fields within legal studies. Furthermore in the immediate context of the NLUs, the worry is that students who are paying substantial fees will gravitate towards optional courses that are closely tied to the needs of the corporate legal sector while ignoring other areas of academic inquiry. Yet another localized criticism is that if students are free to choose among optional courses, most of them will opt for those taught by teachers who are known to be lenient in evaluation and make lesser demands in respect of reading assignments and class participation requirements. This may lead to oversubscription in optional courses which do not substantially enhance the student’s knowledge or skill levels while at the same time the instructors who enforce more rigorous standards are likely to be left with smaller class sizes.

Irrespective of the factors outlined above, all of the institutions covered in our study have introduced a certain extent of flexibility in their curricular practices. In most cases, students in the final year of the five-year integrated programmes can opt for some elective courses. However, only a few NLUs have implemented a Choice-Based Credit System (CBCS) in the substantive sense by introducing optional subjects during the earlier years of study. In its original curricular structure that was followed for nearly three decades, NLSIU Bangalore provided for 8 optional subjects during the fifth year, which accounted for approximately 13% of the aggregate coursework requirements. However, the same institution has moved towards more flexibility in the academic year 2017-2018, with optional subjects commencing during the third year of undergraduate studies. In this respect, WBNUJS Kolkata had been the first mover among the NLUs with a Choice-Based Credit System (CBCS) introduced in 2008-2009 wherein optional subjects commence in the third year. NALSAR Hyderabad started a comparable transition in 2012-2013, with the coursework during the fourth and fifth year largely consisting of optional subjects that have a further demarcation between Elective, Seminar and Clinical courses. Now that this transition is complete, the optional subjects account for 36% of the aggregate coursework in the five-year integrated undergraduate programme. Institutions such as RGNUL Patiala and NLU Odisha allow their undergraduate students to obtain a thematic specialization by picking a designated cluster of subjects during the fourth and fifth year of studies. In such cases, the student can be awarded a first degree in law (LL.B.) with honours in the chosen area of specialization.

If we turn towards the LL.M. programme (Masters’ in Law), the University Grants Commission (UGC) has laid down some prescriptions for its curricular structure from time to time. The most recent set of prescriptions directed the transition towards a one-year LL.M. programme beginning in the academic year 2013-2014. Accordingly, this programme now requires enrolled students to complete three compulsory subjects, six optional subjects and a master’s level dissertation within an academic year. The three compulsory subjects are as follows:-

(i) ‘Law and Justice in a Globalizing World’;

(ii) ‘Comparative Public Law and Systems of Governance’;

(iii) ‘Research Methods and Legal Writing’.

The six optional subjects can be spread across semesters or trimesters, depending on the model chosen by each institution. LL.M. students are required to opt for at least four optional subjects that form part of a thematic cluster in order to obtain a specialization. While some NLUs ask their postgraduate students to opt for an area of specialization (with a specified basket of optional courses) at the beginning of the academic year, others allow them to build their specialisations over the course of the programme. Those who do not take the required number of courses to build a particular specialization can receive a ‘General’ LL.M. The writing of a master’s level dissertation is undoubtedly an intensive exercise. The written output can be further developed for publication in scholarly journals or serve as the basis for pursuing M.Phil. and Ph.D. programmes in due course.

In the long-run, offering a broader range of optional courses requires sustained investments in faculty development, both in terms of holding regular recruitment cycles and the enhancement of expertise for teaching and research. This is even more important for the purpose of running postgraduate and research offerings such as the LL.M., M.Phil. and Ph.D. programmes. Many of the NLUs are struggling in this regard since they do not have sufficient depth in their teaching capacity to offer such advanced programmes of study. While a pool of recently recruited Assistant Professors may be capable of teaching the compulsory subjects at the undergraduate level, the delivery of courses at the level of offering thematic specializations, postgraduate courses and research supervision requires faculty members who possess significantly more teaching experience and scholarly credentials.

The optional courses offered by the faculty members at each institution can be supplemented with shorter optional courses taught by practitioners and visiting scholars. Courses taught by judges, advocates and those working in commercial law firms as well as business houses can forge meaningful relationships in the long-run. These can directly benefit the institution in terms of the knowledge disseminated while also improving the employment opportunities for students upon graduation. Inviting scholars who are affiliated with other Universities, Research Institutions and Civil Society organisations is also an effective way of compensating for inadequacies in teaching capacity. Furthermore, the NLUs have now been included in the Global Initiative of Academic Networks (GIAN). Under this programme, the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Government of India gives financial assistance for inviting academicians from foreign universities to teach short courses, carrying 1 credit (12-16 class hours) or 2 credits (20-24 class hours). While some NLUs have begun utilizing this route, all of them could conceivably benefit from it.

If the requisite financial resources are available, invitations can be issued to foreign academics to be engaged as ‘Visiting Professors’ or ‘Research Fellows’ for a semester or an entire academic year. This route can potentially be better utilized if the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Government of India exempts foreign academicians from the requirement of receiving a minimum annual salary of US$ 25,000 in order to obtain an employment visa to work in India. Given the relatively lower pay-scales in India’s public universities, it is ordinarily quite difficult to earmark funds for paying significantly higher salaries to foreign nationals. On this count, some of the private universities which have much higher fee-structures and stronger financial backing are finding it easier to engage the services of foreign faculty members for longer durations, often by paying them much higher salaries than their Indian counterparts.

Suggested Readings:

1. Upendra Baxi, 'Notes Towards a Socially Relevant Legal Education: A Working Paper for the UGC Regional Workshops in Law 1975-77', 51 Journal of the Bar Council of India (1975-76).

2. Jill Cottrell, '10+2+5: A Change in the Structure of Indian Legal Education', 36(3) Journal of Legal Education 331-357 (1986).

3. Gurjeet Singh, 'Revamping Professional Legal Education: Some Observations on Revised LL.B. Curriculum of Bar Council of India', 41(2) Journal of the Indian Law Institute 237-255 (1999).

4. Divya Venugopal, 'The Elephant in the Room: Dealing with Final Year Disengagement', 7(1) NALSAR Student Law Review 62-75 (2008).

5. N.R. Madhava Menon, 'The Transformation of Indian Legal Education – A Blue Paper' (Harvard Law School Programme on the Indian Legal Profession, 2012).

6. Jonathan Gingerich & Nicholas Robinson, 'Responding to the Market: The Impact of the Rise of Corporate Law Firms on Elite Legal Education in India' (Harvard Law School Program on the Legal Profession, 2014).