What Law School Should Teach in the AI Era ft. Patrick Baker
AI can write fast, generate ideas fast and be fast. But Patrick Baker wants law students and lawyers to remember something more important: they’re the ones that still have to think.
In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Patrick Baker, law professor at University of Tennessee at Martin and Founder of Baker Law Firm, to talk about legal education, critical thinking, AI in the classroom, IRAC as a way of thinking and why lawyers are still needed in a world where AI is built to please the user instead of challenge them.
AI can give you an answer in seconds but that doesn’t mean it’s the right answer.
In this episode of Between the Briefs by Steno, Adrian Cea and Joe Stephens sit down with Patrick Baker, law professor at University of Tennessee at Martin and Founder of Baker Law Firm, for a practical conversation on legal education, AI, critical thinking, law school reform and what it really means to think like a lawyer.
Plus, Patrick’s hottest take: AI is built to please you and lawyers would do well to remember that AI is built to please you and lawyers should remember that shouldn't be the priority
What You'll Learn:
- Why Patrick believes a JD teaches critical thinking beyond traditional legal practice
- Why AI can weaken legal thinking when students use it before building the basics
- How Patrick separates AI use between introductory and advanced law classes
- Why students need tools to verify AI output instead of blindly trusting it
- Why real wills, trusts, contracts and court documents help students understand the law
- Why IRAC isn’t just a writing structure, but a way lawyers think
- How rural practice changes the lawyer’s role in the community
- Why law schools may need more regular assessments instead of one final exam for everything
- Why AI’s biggest legal danger is that it sounds confident even when it is wrong
AI can help lawyers and students move faster, but only if they already know how to think, question, verify and tell the difference between a useful answer and a dangerous one.
Highlights:
01:01 Introduction
02:02 Patrick’s Path From Teaching to Law
04:29 Does AI Weaken Critical Thinking?
06:20 Patrick’s Rules for AI in the Classroom
07:44 What Law Students Miss About Business
10:15 Practicing Law in Rural America
14:12 Finding Purpose Through Guardian Ad Litem Work
16:35 Bringing Real-World Cases Into the Classroom
18:40 Patrick’s Soft Socratic Teaching Style
20:51 What Law School Needs to Change
22:09 Should Law Schools Teach More AI?
23:05 What Makes a Better Professor?
24:49 How Farm Work Shaped Patrick’s Career
27:27 Farming for Mental Health
27:54 How Law School Teaches Critical Thinking
28:32 IRAC as a Way of Thinking
30:50 Knowing Your Audience in Rural Practice
35:16 Why Local Expertise Matters
35:49 Who Should Actually Go to Law School?
38:22 Does the Bar Exam Still Work?
39:30 Should the Bar Exam Be More Practical?
41:56 Why There Have Always Been “Too Many Lawyers”
42:21 Patrick’s Hot Take: AI in Law
44:59 Closing Thoughts
Quotes:
- “Having a law degree is probably, in my opinion, the best graduate degree on the market because it just teaches you how to think”
- “You still have to have the critical thinking skills to discern whether or not it’s correct.”
- “If I misidentify the problem, I am not going to get the result that I want.”
- “It’s not my job to tell you what you want to hear. It’s my job to tell you objectively where things stand.”