books and that this created major problems for legal education, further he criticised the common use of lectures and said that seminars were much more effectix e as a pedagogical tool. LnfortunateK’ seminars were e.\pensi\ e and the facidties lacked resources to use them to an\ larger extent in the education." The guests from Denmark, I'inland and Norwax' presented the status of the legal education in their countries and professor 1 laataja reported that a reform of the legal education in I'inland was discussed and the changes would lead to a much shorter new law education.'' Manx of the Sxxedish delegates joined in the discussion but there xxas no consensus on the xxax' to solxe the educational problems. IVofessor I lolmbäek (fromL ppsala) said that it xxas xx rong to use the same educational forms in all the subjects. I he difference betxveen subjects also made different educational methods necessary.' Professor Schmidt criticised the existing currieulum and stated that there xvere too main subjects studied. It xvould be an improxement if the subjects xvere more extensixe so the students could get better indepth knoxx ledge." Professor I'Teh'if presented his oxvn experiments xvith seminars substituting lectures. Professor Bergendal (Lund) suggested c]uestion of different educational forms was not important but the teachers should axoid concentrating on details and thex should not trx to gix e lectures on a too adx anced theoretical lex el.'' .\part from discussing the educational structure and pedagogx' the conference also dealt xvith the questitm of practical training xx ithin legal education. Siuiie of the contributors stressed the diff'icultx’ in prox iding all the laxx students in Sxveden adec]uate practice at the laxx courts after the exam. Others argued that it xvould be better to gixe 55 Sv|T 19^,6, p 313 56 SvJT 1946, p 312 57 Sv)T 1946, p 313 58 SvJT 1946, p 313 59 Sv)T 1946. p 313 4^0
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=