REPORT ON THE RESEARCH REGARDING THE QUALITY OF THE HIGHER LEGAL EDUCATION IN GEORGIA by საქართველოს ახალგაზრდა იურისტთა ასოციაცია/Georgian Young Lawyers' Association

REPORT ON THE RESEARCH REGARDING THE QUALITY OF THE HIGHER LEGAL EDUCATION IN GEORGIA

Tbilisi 2014

This research is funded by the Eurasia Partnership Foundation (EPF) under the auspices of the project “Civil Initiative for the Independent Judiciary,” with the help of the American People, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and East-West Management Institute (EWMI). The contents of the report are the sole responsibility of the author organizations: Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association, Article 42 of the Constitution, ELSA - Georgia and may not reflect the position of EPF, the USAID, and the government of the US government or EWMI. The research is carried out by the Coalition for the “Independent and Transparent Judiciary” under the auspices of the project – “Quality Education for Strong Institutions.”

Foundation for the Support of Legal Education

Authors: GIORGI GOBRONIDZE NINO TVALTVADZE MAKA GIOSHVILI ZURAB BEZHASHVILI INSTITUTE OF THE SOCIAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSES Editor: KHATUNA KVIRALASHVILI Tech. Editor: IRAKLI SVANIDZE Responsible of publication: TAMAR METREVELI

Was edited and published in the Foundation for the Support of Legal Education 15, J. Kakhidze st. Tbilisi 0102, Georgia (+99532) 293 61 01, 295 23 53

Coping or Disseminating of publication for commercial purpose without Foundation’s written permission is prohibited -------------------------------------------------------------------------------© 2014, Foundation for the Support of Legal Education

Contents Research summary----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................14 1. Goal and Methodology of the Research ........................................................................................................15 1.1. Goal of the Research ..............................................................................................................................15 1.2. Research Methodology...........................................................................................................................17 1.2.1. The Qualitative Component of the Research ..................................................................................17 1.2.2. Quantitative Component of the Research........................................................................................21 1.2.3. Demographic Profile of the Research .............................................................................................23 2. Overview of the International Legal Education System................................................................................26 2.1. About the Overview ...............................................................................................................................26 2.2. Quality Determinants of a Legal Education ...........................................................................................27 2.2.1. Legislative Mechanisms of Regulating a Higher Legal Education .................................................27 2.2.2. Communication Form among a State and a Higher Educational Facility .......................................28 2.2.3. Flexibility of the Legal Education System ......................................................................................31 3. Overview of the Regulatory Normative Base of the Legal Education System in Georgia ...........................36 3.1. Overview of the Legislative Acts...........................................................................................................37 3.1.1. Reform.............................................................................................................................................37 3.1.2. Accreditation/Authorization............................................................................................................38 3.1.3. Structure and Management of Higher Educational Entities ............................................................39 3.1.4. Regulated Professions .....................................................................................................................40 3.1.5. Factors, Affecting Legal Education Quality....................................................................................43 3.2. Analysis of Syllabuses and Programs ....................................................................................................46 3.2.1. The Education Course Programs (Syllabuses) ................................................................................46 3.2.2. Indicators for Evaluation of Syllabuses...........................................................................................48 3.2.3 Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................50 3.3. Educational Program ..............................................................................................................................52 3.3.1. Education Steps ..............................................................................................................................53 3.3.2. Qualifications’ Structure for the European Environment of a Higher Education ...........................54 3.3.3. Education Program Components.....................................................................................................56 3.3.4. Program Evaluation Indicators........................................................................................................57 3.3.5. Evaluation of Educational Programs...............................................................................................59 4. Qualitative and Quantitative Research ..........................................................................................................59 4.1. Guideline for the Qualitative Research ..................................................................................................60

4.2. Ensuring Quality Legal Education in Higher Educational Facilities in Georgia ..................................61 Main Results of Quantitative Research .........................................................................................................61 4.2.1. General Tendencies .........................................................................................................................61 4.2.2. University Education Quality..........................................................................................................64 4.2.3. Evaluating the knowledge received at the bachelors’ and masters’ level and requirements towards “entering” the profession...........................................................................................................................72 4.2.4. Attitude towards Qualification Exams ............................................................................................75 4.2.5. “Remaining” in the Profession and Desirable Career .....................................................................76 4.2.6. Student Mobility..............................................................................................................................78 4.2.7. Employment Opportunities .............................................................................................................82 4.2.8. Continuing an Education at a Higher Level ....................................................................................86 4.3. Coherence of a Qualified Lawyer with the Employer Requirements at the Labor Market....................87 Main Results of Qualitative Research ...........................................................................................................87 5. General Evaluation of a Problem and Recommendations.............................................................................89 5.1. General Evaluation of a Higher Legal Education Quality in Georgia....................................................89 5.2. Problems Relating to a Higher Legal Education ....................................................................................89 5.2.1. Legislative and University-Internal Regulation of a Higher Legal Education................................90 5.2.2. Coherence of a Higher Legal Education with the Labor Market Requirements .............................92 5.2.3. Educational Programs .....................................................................................................................94 5.2.4. Academic Personnel........................................................................................................................94 5.3. Other Tendencies....................................................................................................................................95

Research Summary Georgia is the transitional state, which aspires towards the rule of law and establishment of the democratic values. The strong, developed legal institutions, such as court, prosecution, lawyer corps, etc. – play the key role for this purpose. The major precondition for the strengthening and the development of those institutions (apart from the political will, civil society control and the legislative mechanisms) is the existence of the competent professionals, without which the effective functioning of the above institutions is impossible. In any country, the major precondition for the professionalism of a staff is an educational system. Therefore, the quality of the legal education is directly reflected in the level of the quality and professionalism of the court, law-enforcement and other public or private service workers. The quality of the legal education has not been fundamentally examined in Georgia since the nineties, when universities gained the autonomy and took the responsibility of independently providing a quality education. Even today – not only there is no examination of the quality of a legal education, but also, there is even no definition of the education quality. The Sector Characteristics’ Document only provides the list of the minimum competences that the holder of a relevant qualification (bachelor, master, doctorate) should have. However, there is no description of how the mentioned competence should be transferred from a higher educational institution to a student.

Goals and Objectives of the Research The main goal of the research is to assess the quality of the education, provided to students by the higher legal educational institutions in Georgia. In addition, the research aims to assess what are the requirements of the law-related labor market in Georgia and whether the graduates comply with those requirements. Considering the goal, the objectives of the research are the following:   

Defining the term “Quality Legal Education”, which entails elaboration of the indicators, measuring the quality of a legal education; Based on the identified indicators, to evaluate the quality of the legal education, provided by higher legal educational institutions at the bachelor, master and doctorate levels; To identify the requirements of the labor market that the law graduates must comply with; in addition, to assess compliance of the qualification of the law graduates with the requirements of the contemporary labor market.

Research Methodology The research was conducted applying both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies. At the first stage of the research, the theoretic part was prepared; for this purpose, the research group

has examined and analyzed both the legislative acts and universities’ internal documents, regulating the legal education in Georgia, as well as the best international legal practices. The special attention was paid to such indicators, as the following: the legislative and institutional regulation of an educational system, organizing the process of an education, structure, standards of gaining the qualification and entering the profession, research activities and an education methodology. The practices of the leading universities in each of the countries were analyzed, during which, apart from the above indicators, the major attention was paid to an educational curriculum, organizing the educational process and the flexibility of an educational process. This gave the researchers a possibility to collect enough information for conducting the qualitative research. As a result, the focus-group guideline was elaborated. The focus groups engaged the experts of the legal education, as well as the major stakeholders of the labor market. Therefore, within the qualitative research, on the one hand – the criteria of the legal education quality was established, while on another hand – the labor market was examined. Based on the legal education quality indicators, elaborated as a result of the qualitative research, the questionnaire was prepared; the questionnaire was applied to conduct the quantitative research. Total of 1’350 respondents participated: 1’000 students, 350 professor-lecturers and representatives of legal faculty administration. The research has covered almost all of the higher educational institutions operating in Georgia, which offer students a higher legal education.

Stages of the Research Overview of the foreign legal education systems The major goal of examining the foreign legal education systems was to elaborate the measurable indicators for the further assessment of the legal education quality in Georgia. Therefore, during the research, particular attention was paid to the criteria, applied in other countries to assess the quality of a higher legal education. The goal of the overview was not to select the foreign model, which is the most suitable for Georgia. For achieving the objective, the research group has examined the higher legal educational systems of the eleven (11) countries. During the selection of the countries, the few major factors were paid a particular attention: the geographic location, legal culture, the uniqueness of the higher legal educational system. considering these factors, the following countries were selected: the United States of America (USA), Canada, England, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Lithuania, Czech Republic and Poland. Naturally, not all of the selected countries can be considered as having the successful examples of the higher legal education model. However, the researchers were interested in the circumstances, which created the obstacles for specific countries to transform and develop the legal educational system. Based on this part of the research, the discussion guideline was created. As a result of the research, the following components were considered as important for the quality of the higher legal education:

  

The legislative mechanisms of regulating the higher legal education; The mechanisms of elaborating the standards and regulations of the higher legal education; the form of communication among the state and a higher educational institution; The flexibility of a higher legal education system; this, in its turn, includes the subcomponents, such as the multitude of the optional subjects, interdisciplinary nature, academic personnel and compliance of the taught subjects with the ongoing tendencies in a country.

Overview of the normative base, regulating the legal education system in Georgia There is no special legal act that would regulate the legal education quality in Georgia, except for the Sector Characteristics’ Document. Therefore, within examination of the normative basis, regulating the legal education system in Georgia, the assessment covered all of the laws and bylaws, which regulate the higher education, education quality, accreditation and authorization processes in Georgia. The analysis has reflected the factors affecting the quality of a legal education and represent direct or indirect preconditions for creation of a pool of a qualified legal professionals. The factors are the following: 1. The state standard of a legal education – the legal education, as a regulated academic higher educational program, requires a specific approach and a regulation. This is why we consider it appropriate to create the sector-specific regulation mechanism – a unified act (for example, the law on the legal education, which defines the unified state standard of a legal education; through such a law, the state should clearly express its position on what it means to be a lawyer, what should a lawyer know and what skills a lawyer should have); 2. The effective role of the Services for Ensuring Quality – it is necessary to strengthen its services and to improve the methodology, to elaborate the strategic vision and action plans. It is also necessary to focus on the regulated professions, so that the state expresses its firm approach towards those professions; the quality control should be permanently supported to create the strong pool of lawyers in the country; 3. The library – the condition of libraries in the universities is far from perfect. In this regard, it is necessary to continue work and to make a library one of the most accessible places for students, where they will spend a lot of time; 4. Academic personnel – it should be noted, that within a specific period of time, it has become a tendency that the same person is teaching in a number of universities in various regions of Georgia and, if thinking realistically – it is often impossible for one person to make such a large-scale effort. It is necessary to ensure maximum incentives for the local staff members, so that the same persons are not disproportionally burdened with a large number of teaching hours (which represents an obstacle for systematically conducting quality and qualified lectures); 5. Analysis of the syllabuses and programs – simultaneously with the analysis of the legislative norms, regulating a higher legal education in Georgia, the key part of the

qualitative component of the research is the analysis of the syllabuses and programs of the higher educational institutions in Georgia. The analysis of the syllabuses has reflected the following problems: State universities:  The lists of the educational methods include almost all of the possible methods. In practice, it is impossible to apply all of them during a lecture period;  The only methodology indicated is the classic lecture, while the goals do not comply with the given methodology. It is impossible to achieve the expected results - such as the improvement of the research skills through the lectures only;  The expected outcomes of the study are not thought through. In addition, the correlation of the specific subjects and the expected outcomes is not specified. In some cases, the outcomes are not indicated and in some cases the outcomes are simply listed without a context (knowledge and awareness, ability of applying the knowledge in practice, ability to draw conclusions, communication skill, learning skills, values);  It is not indicated whether the subject is mandatory or optional. Although, this is not an obligatory requirement, however, it is recommended to indicate this information to make it easier for a student to prepare for a subject based on the syllabus;  The graph “preconditions for the enrollment to the course” is not filled.

Private universities     

The content of the educational course is often improperly formulated and often lacks an exact indication of the relevant literature (pages); The identity, status and information about a lecturer is not indicated; Credits – are either less than the actual work to be conducted by the students or there is no indication of the expected study hours; The goals of an educational course are formulated too broadly; The expected outcomes of an education are not specified (knowledge and awareness, the ability of practical application, ability to draw conclusions, communication skill, learning skills, values);

As for the analysis of the educational programs, the following tendencies were revealed: In case of the state universities: 

The expected results of an educational program are not clearly formulated, therefore, there is a problem of their compliance with a goal;



    

The program does not describe the relevance of the material-technical base (infrastructure). It is only broadly indicated that the material-technical base corresponds to the standard; It is only broadly indicated about a library that it corresponds to the requirements; however, there is no description, characteristics, number of books, etc; There is lack of optional subjects; The system of credit distribution is non-compliant; The program is too broad; The academic qualification to be granted is not indicated in English;

In case of private universities:    



The academic qualification to be granted is not indicated in English; The potential fields of employment are not indicated; There is no distribution of the credits among the educational courses; The program does not reflect the compliance of the material-technical base (infrastructure). It is only broadly indicated that the material-technical base is compliant with the standards; It is only broadly indicated that the library complies with the standard; however, the description, characteristics, number of books, etc. – is not indicated;

Quantitative research Apart from examining the requirements of the employers, the major goal of the qualitative research was to elaborate criteria, defining the legal education for the research questionnaire. The major results of the qualitative research may be presented in the following way: One of the major preconditions for receiving the quality legal education is planning the educational process (the educational program in universities, practical work, internships, etc.) in such a way to ensure the compliance of the qualification, received by the faculty graduates with the requirements of the labor market/employers. The qualitative research has revealed a few components (the “systematic” indicators), which, in the opinion of the respondents, represent a guarantee for receiving the quality legal education: Educational program: part of the research participants (mainly, the civil sector representatives/ employers) tended to think that a lawyer must have a general qualification, while part of the research participants favored the narrow specialization of the lawyers starting from the third year of studies. The research participants have expressed the opinion, that along with the theoretical knowledge, it is important to deepen the practical experience (an ability of properly applying the gained knowledge in practice). The following activities will also contribute towards the quality legal education: conducting interactive lectures, resolving case studies, translating the legal literature into

Georgian (the judges explained that inexistence of the legal literature in Georgian represents a significant barrier in receiving quality legal education and in getting employed). Qualified personnel: the educational program cannot be implemented successfully without a proper human resource (during the group discussions, it was mentioned that the major part of the professorlecturers is a theorist and there are cases when they are not aware of the amendments to the legislation). Increasing the number of the practitioner professor-lecturers (which is difficult because such practitioners have very busy schedules) that will be able to elaborate quality and proper syllabuses will ensure increasing the quality of the legal education. In the opinion of the research participants, the increased number of the students in the groups negatively affects the legal education quality (the universities must establish a number of the prospective students to be enrolled to the legal faculties in accordance with the labor market requirements; however, due to the commercial incentives, the universities refuse to do so). Apart from this, some of the research participants have negatively evaluated the existing model of the legal education, which is the analogue of the western model, since everything is “copied” without any adjustment to the local context. The research participants have indicated the skills that a qualified lawyer/graduate must have to demanded at the labor market:        

In-depth knowledge of the law (theory); Knowledge of the foreign language and computer programs; Skills and abilities of management and communication with clients/citizens; Argument-based thinking both in writing and verbally; Knowledge of the legislation of a country, with the organization/company of which the lawyer will have cooperation (if relevant); Knowledge of the professional ethics of a public servant; Ability of interpretation; Responsibility.

Getting established at the labor market requires the compliance with the concrete criteria, necessary for entering the legal profession. For example: the testing does not ensure proper assessment of the professionalism and it is necessary to introduce additional components (resolving the case examples, interviews, etc.). Part of the research participants negatively evaluates the required duration of the internships, necessary to become a lawyer or a judge and discuss the need of increasing its duration. The legal clinic plays one of the significant roles in becoming a qualified lawyer and gaining practical skills and abilities (which is a guarantee of finding a spot at the labor market); the legal clinic remains to be one of the important alternatives due to the lack of the practical knowledge. However, the labor market lacks the information on the legal clinic. In addition, not all of the universities have a legal clinic and the number of the prospective students to be engaged in it is limited due to the lack of the human resources.

Quantitative research The quantitative research has shown that the significant majority (more than 70%) of all four target groups of the respondents (bachelors, masters, doctorates, professor-lecturers) consider that the possibility of receiving a quality legal education is an acute problem in Georgia. At the same time, the respondents (among all of the target groups) positively evaluate the qualifications of almost all categories of specialists (judges, advocates, prosecutors/investigators, notaries, legal consultants). The only exception is the investigators/prosecutors, whose qualification is negatively evaluated among the professor-lecturers. The notaries and judges were most positively evaluated, while advocated and legal consultants received less positive evaluations. The negative evaluations were mainly directed at the regional higher educational institutions (both state and private). All of the four categories of the respondents positively evaluate all of the other educational institutions – especially, the Higher School of Justice. However, the positive evaluations are reflected in other cases as well in the following order of priority: the Educational Center of Justice, GYLA Legal Education and Information Center, higher educational institutions in Tbilisi – both state and private. At the same time it is notable, that a significant number of the respondents (15-35%) found it difficult to evaluate other educational institutions (in terms of providing legal education), except for the higher educational institutions (universities). All of the target groups of the respondents express more of the positive evaluations in relation to the private higher educational institutions in comparison with the state universities. In terms of the quantitative research, it is notable that although 70% considers the quality legal education to be an acute problem, the general approaches are positive. In this context, the special attention should be paid to the group that has negative evaluations – which is a much smaller group but requires consideration. For example, if out of ten (10) students four (4) are dissatisfied and six (6) are satisfied, the majority turns out to be satisfied; however, it could be that the opinion of the four (4) students is more important, if those are the good and motivated students that evaluate the education more critically. The average data reflects the general tendency, in which the opinion of the majority is paid more attention; however, we should not only concentrate on the general tendencies and should take into consideration the large number of the dissatisfied respondents. At the same time, such results might reflect the indifferent attitude towards an educational process and lack of the critically thinking individuals, which in its essence, is a significant problem in the legal educational system of Georgia.

Research Recommendations 1. Legislative and internal (university-specific) regulation of a higher legal education Despite a rather long list of the conflict of interest cases, prescribed in the legislation, there is still a risk that the authorization/accreditation group member and a seeker might have a covert deal;

specifically, instead of gaining a status/accreditation, an institution might offer an accreditation representative to get employed in the future at the university. In order to minimize the mentioned risk it is necessary to introduce the provision to the relevant legislative act, prescribing that a member of an authorization/accreditation group should not have a right to enter the employment relations with the accreditation/authorization seeker within a specific period of time after the accreditation/authorization takes place. This will not only give the possibility to avoid the conflict of interest at the beginning of the process, but also to avoid any kind of interest of an expert group in terms of future employment at the given institution. Another problematic issue is the composition of the accreditation council. Despite the fact that the research process did not provide a possibility to clearly confirm or reject those fears, it is necessary to revise the composition rule in relation to the higher legal education. Specifically, apart from the representatives of higher educational institutions, the professional unions of lawyers and interest groups from various sectors must participate in the work of the council. According to the law, the legal profession is among the “regulated” ones, along with the medical and pedagogic professions. Despite this, there is still no law on the higher legal education in Georgia, while other regulated professions already fell within the legislative framework. In the opinion of the research group, the enactment of the special law on the higher legal education will significantly support defining the quality and standards of a higher legal education. In addition, it would have been possible to regulate the problematic issues through the law (the problems that represent significant barriers in development of a legal profession in the country). Due to the large demand on the legal education and the large number of the students at the law faculties, the research group took a special interest in so-called “introductory legal education” problem as well. In case if the quality of the legal education improves at the school level and if the uniform national examinations include legal or similar disciplines as the optional subjects, the enrollment-seeker will be far better prepared for the start of the higher educational process. This will naturally have a positive impact on the quality of a higher legal education, since an education is not a one-sided process. The quality depends on the receiver of the knowledge and not only on the provider. As for the internal university regulation mechanisms of the higher legal education, in the first place, the problem of the systematization of the education should be noted. Specifically, a university almost does not define nor regulate the education methodology. The process of examining the university syllabuses has clearly demonstrated that these topics are paid far less attention. This tendency is particularly acute in the state universities. It is important to elaborate a specific approach in relation to the education methodology, to elaborate the education methods and monitoring systems adjusted per individual disciplines.

The regulation of the educational programs in both private and state universities is also important. Apart from the mentioned, there is lack of optional subjects in the state universities, which, as reflected from the foreign practices of the legal education, is one of the important preconditions for the quality education. Resolving the mentioned problem, again, requires elaboration of a uniform standard of the education, which will be mandatory for both private and state higher educational institutions. It is important to elaborate effective mechanisms to ensure that the standards are met in practice. This issue could be regulated under the legislation on the higher legal education. Since the legal profession has the paramount importance for establishing justice and the rule of law in the country, the quality legal education must be an issue of the state policy. In this regard, the research team considers the German model as the most appropriate, in which the legal education is part of the justice policy of the country. As for the practical regulation, in the opinion of the research team, it is most acceptable to engage stakeholders in the quality definition and the supervision process. In addition, the American model is interesting, in which the state delegates its functions to the non-governmental actors, while at the same time, maintains an education part of its policy priorities. 2. Compliance of the legal education with the labor market requirements The compliance of the higher legal education in with the labor market in Georgia depends upon the effective regulation of the profession and elaboration of the comprehensive standards. The modern educational methods, effective mechanisms of their application, practice-oriented education are the components that must be regulated under the legislation on the education and under the internal regulations of universities. One of the important issues for the improvement of the qualification of the law graduates on the labor market is expanding the legal clinic education. In addition, there is lack of communication among employers, state and educational institutions. Therefore, there is a need of engaging all of the stakeholder groups in the process of quality definition and regulation. 3. Educational programs In our opinion, it is important to consider the issue of the educational programs not only in terms of university-specific internal regulations and to think of it in the broad perspective. The quantitative research has clearly demonstrated that the higher educational institutions do not offer anything new to the masters’ students. One third of the masters’ students disagrees with the statement that the masters’ program offers students new (different) courses in comparison with the bachelors’ program. One fourth of the bachelors consider that the educational program does not give a possibility to gain narrow specialization and that preparation of the bachelors’ work is not paid much attention at a faculty.

The research process has reflected the problems in terms of the research component at the masters’ and doctorate programs. There is a problem in terms of teaching a foreign language at practically each level of education. This problem, just as the issue of the narrow specialization has been acute in the process of the group discussions as well. It is important for higher educational institutions to pay attention to resolving the problems. It is also important to elaborate specific standards and mechanisms of their monitoring in terms of language study and specialization. Existence of this problem also indicates lack of communication among the employer and the educational institution. Therefore, in this case too, our recommendation is to maximally engage the stakeholders. Based on the analysis of both the educational programs and the requirements of employers we may conclude that entering the profession does not guarantee an employment. Therefore, an ability of a student to pass the profession-specific examination cannot serve as the criteria defining the education quality. The requirements for entering the profession, as a rule, reflect the knowledge received by students in universities. Therefore, lower the quality of a university education – lower the standard for entering the profession will be. 4. Academic personnel An effective way to resolve the problem is, first of all, optimization of the higher legal education system. This means, on the one hand, strict monitoring of the education at the legal faculty, while on another hand, providing incentives to the academic personnel to make it possible for them to satisfy their material needs by working at one place (so that lecturers do not need to work at multiple places). It is also important to create incentives for academic personnel in the regions. Unfortunately, there is a serious deficit of the local academic personnel in the regions.

Introduction The current research, which represents the analysis of the quality of the higher legal education in Georgia, was prepared through financial assistance of the East-West Management Institute (EWMI) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) within the program, supporting the NGO coalition for the “Independent and Transparent Judiciary”. Current project was implemented by the Foundation for the Support of Legal Education (FSLE) of the Georgian Young Lawyers Association (GYLA), Article 42 of the Constitution and ELSAGeorgia (European Law Student Association). Due to the complexity of the research topic, the Institute of the Social Studies and Analysis was engaged in the project as well. The FSLE of GYLA was supervising the progress of the project. The goal of the research is defining and evaluating the quality of the higher legal education in Georgia, identification of the existing problems and elaborating the recommendations for resolving those problems.

Due to the complexity of the problem, the approach of the project group was comprehensive. Therefore, the research of the quality of the higher legal education involves the following: overview of the international practices of regulating the higher legal education quality, analysis of the domestic legislation, as well as the analysis of the study programs and syllabuses of the legal faculties of the higher education institutions in Georgia. The research also examines employer demands to better outline the connection between the higher legal education and the labor market in Georgia. The first chapter of the present report covers the goals of the research, the methodology and the instruments of collecting empirical materials. One of the difficult and important challenges of the researches was elaborating measurable criteria for evaluating the legal education quality. For this purpose, as already mentioned, the international practices were overviewed, which is presented in the second chapter of the report. The analysis of the international practices represents one of the components for defining the measurable criteria for evaluating the quality of the legal education in Georgia; however, it is clearly not enough. For achieving the goal, the research group has conducted detailed examination of the legislation that regulates the higher education in Georgia, as well as the programs and syllabuses applied in the law faculties of the universities in Georgia. The third chapter is dedicated to the overview of this information. The above steps represent the preparatory stage, during which the theoretical part of the research was elaborated, since the prepared and analyzed information represent the basis for determining the primary variables for evaluation of the legal education quality. For achieving the final results, the qualitative research was conducted, the results of which are presented in the fourth chapter. The fifth chapter of the report represents a resume, summary, which evaluates the higher legal education in Georgia comprehensively, explains the reasons of the problem and provides the relevant recommendations.

1. Goal and Methodology of the Research 1.1. Goal of the Research “Quality Education for Strong Institutions” is aimed at strengthening the higher legal education in Georgia, identification of the problems existing in the system, through examining and analyzing them. As you know, Georgia is a transitional country, which aims towards supremacy of the law and establishing the democratic values. The strong, well-developed legislative institutions, such as the court, prosecution, pool of lawyers, etc. play a vital role in achieving this goal. The preconditions for strengthening and development of the mentioned institutions, apart from the political will, civil

oversight and legislative mechanisms, are the competent professionals, without which the effective functioning of the mentioned institutions is impossible. In any country, the professionalism of the prepared professionals depends on the educational system. Therefore, the quality of the legal education directly affects the professionalism of the employees of the judicial, law-enforcement, other public or private entities; this is especially important today, as a number of institutional reforms are underway in Georgia. Higher legal education is an imperative legal requirement for holding a number of public offices. Therefore, the examination of the quality of the legal education, existing problems and searching for the ways to resolve them, is a significant step forward towards supporting the justice, establishing the supremacy of the law, and in general, for increasing the legal culture. It is notable that the FSLE along with its partners, is the first to undertake the responsibility of conducting such a research in Georgia. The problem is not only the lack of examining the quality of the legal education, but also the lack of definition of the quality. The “Document of the Sector Characteristics” prepared by the National Center of Education Quality Development in Georgia provides only the list of the minimum competences required from a relevant qualification holder (bachelor, master, doctor); however, it is not defined how the student should develop these competences in the educational institutions. Based on the analysis of the ongoing processes in the educational system of the country it can be concluded that the quality of the legal education did not fundamentally change in the country since the universities gained autonomy at the end of the 90-ies and took an independent responsibility for providing quality education. Following all of the above, the goal of the research is to evaluate the quality of the higher lega education, provided by the institutons to the students in Georgia; in addition, the goal is to examine the requirements of the labor market in Georgia for the holders of the higher degrees and whether the holders of the higher degrees meet those requirements. Based on this goal, the following objectives should be elaborated:

 Operationalization of the term “quality legal education”, which means elaboration of the measurable variables for examining the quality of the legal education.  At the next stage following the elaboration of the measurable variables, to evaluate the quality of the legal education provided by the higher education facilities at the bachelors, masters and doctorate stages, based on the elaborated indicators.  To examine the requirements of the labor market that the persons with the legal education should comply with. In addition, to evaluate the compliance of the qualification of the persons that have legal education with the labor market requirements.

1.2. Research Methodology The research methodology was elaborated based on the nature of the research object and the goal of the research. We have already discussed the goals of the research. As for the research object - the quality of the legal education, at the first, it seems to have purely qualitative nature and it is difficult to evaluate. Although, since the education is a product that the higher educational institutions offer their consumers (students), there are criteria, to define its quality, as of a product and there is a demand for the quality product (education). As a result, there is a research object, which requires systematic and complex approach. Therefore, the methodology of the research is complex as well, because only qualitative or only quantitative methods would not have yielded the relevant results. Therefore, both the quantitative and qualitative methods of the sociological research have been used for the purpose of achieving the research goals and objectives. The qualitative research has allowed to create indicators for defining the quality of the legal education, examination of the main problematic tendencies related to the legal education in Georgia and identifying the dominant requirements in the labor market and problems relating to the qualification of the persons having legal education. The quantitative research was conducted for the purpose of examining the validity of the tendencies, revealed at the qualitative stage of the research. As already mentioned, the quantitative research has allowed the target groups (bachelors, masters, doctors, university professors/lecturers and the representatives of the administration of the legal faculties) to evaluate the current environment based on the indicators, which define the quality legal education. 1.2.1. The Qualitative Component of the Research

The main objective of the qualitative component of the research was to define the criteria for evaluating the quality of the higher legal education; in addition, to define the mutual compliance of the demand and supply among the holders of the legal education and the labor market. As already mentioned, the major challenge of the research group was inexistence of the measurable criteria for defining the quality of the legal education. In every case, when the quality legal education is the topic, different components of the education are implied. To make it possible to identify the determinants of the quality of the higher legal education, as of a product, the research group has conducted the analysis and examination of the international practices relating to the system of the legal education. So-called “Desk Research” was conducted, which implies an analysis of the pre-existing research and on the basis of such analysis, finding answers to the questions, posed under the current research. Since there is no definition of the quality legal education, it was clearly necessary to examine the indicators and determinants that in combination form the standards of the education abroad. The major target areas were the US and the countries of Europe. The researchers focused on both the countries with the long history of the legal education system development and on the countries, which were able to reform the educational system in the recent period and which were able to

achieve the desirable outcomes. Therefore, the examination of the international practices included multiple directions. On the one hand, the Anglo-Saxon and on the other hand, the continental European models were examined. The features of the higher legal educational system in each of the legal cultures, the link between the legal education entities and the legal institutions, the standards for the evaluation of the legal education were analyzed within the research. At the same time, the practices of the socialist part – of the Eastern European countries were the objects of interest as well; those are the countries that were able to reform the educational system and that have achieved more or less success on the path, where Georgia is now. Due to all of the above, the following topics were examined during the analysis of the international practices (practices of the target countries):  The mechanisms of regulating the system of the higher legal education;  The features of the separate components of the legal education;  The qualification requirements that the law professionals must comply with;  The standards of the higher legal education, existing in the universities;  The link between the higher education entities and the labor market;  The legal education quality standards existing in the higher education entities;  The documents on the quality of the higher legal education, prepared by various organizations and research institutions;  The reform of the legal education system, its stages and the progress;  The tools and the criteria for evaluating the quality of the legal education applied abroad.

Apart from the examination of the foreign practices, the legislative regulation mechanisms applicable to the higher education entities in Georgia, as well as the internal regulations of the educational entities were examined within the qualitative component of the research. The comparison of the data, received as a result of those two pieces of analysis, has contributed towards elaboration of the criteria for evaluating the higher legal education in Georgia. Specifically, the primary variables were determined, which was applied at the following stage of the qualitative research, which involved the discussions with the focus groups. The following participants were engaged in each of the discussions: 1. Education experts; 2. Field specialists (of the legal education). This includes both academic personnel (university professors) and the practicing lawyers.

Total of two (2) group discussions were held with the participation of the mentioned specialists. The number of participants for each of the focus groups was about eight-ten (8-10) persons. The group discussions with the education experts and the field specialists were held in Tbilisi. The group discussions according to the composition of the participants: Geographical entity

Education experts and field Number of the discussions specialists

Tbilisi

The group discussions and the in-depth interviews were held for the purpose of identifying the supply-demand of the labor market in relation to the legal professionals. The focus groups were composed of the following persons:   

Lawyers (representatives of the Bar Association, lawyers of the Ministry of Justice, lawyers employed at the law consulting companies); Representatives of the NGOs (those that offer others legal consultations, and those that hire lawyers for their own needs); Representatives of the international organizations that use the services of lawyers.

The group discussions were held in Tbilisi, Kutaisi and Batumi, with the engagement of the each of the target groups. Overall, total of nine (9) group discussions were held. The group discussions according to the composition (participants) and according to the geographical distribution: Geographic entity

Lawyers

Representatives of the NGOs, private Number of sector and the international discussions organizations

Tbilisi

Kutaisi

Batumi

Number discussions

The selection design (selection of the participants for the group discussions) the selection of the focus group participants was conducted according to the above listed criteria. The supervisor has recruited the participants and afterwards, forwarded the list of the potential participants of the focus

groups to the analyst of the Social Research and Analysis Institute. Based on the criteria, the analyst has compiled the model of composition of the focus groups and selected the relevant participants for each of the group discussions. The Focus Group Guideline: the focus group guideline was applied as the research tool, which included open-ended or half open-ended questions on those main issues, which are planned to be examined/revealed through the focus groups. In general, the focus group guideline includes 15-20 questions. The facilitator applies the focus group guideline as a tool for orientation in the process of a discussion, to ensure that the main points are not missed out. Based on the tendencies, revealed in the process of the discussion, the facilitator modifies the guideline in accordance with the context. The analyst of the Social Research and Analysis Institute elaborated the focus group guideline. Leading and Recording the Group Discussions: the facilitator of the Social Research and Analysis Institute has led the group discussions. The group discussions were recorded by audio and video recorders (the discussion participants were informed in advance that their discussions are being recorded for the purpose of preparing an analytical report). The transcripts of the recorded materials were prepared. Data Analysis: the analysis of the primary data, received as a result of the transcript of the focus groups, was conducted in various stages: At first stage, the formal analysis of the texts was conducted. The factual and interpretative components of the analysis were separated from each other. At the next stage, the structural analysis of the factual components of the text was conducted; this implies systematization and verification of the factual information from the text. During the following stage, the analysis of the interpretative component of the text was conducted, which revealed the dominating patterns of the evaluations. At the final stage of the analysis, through the synthesis of the interpretative and factual components, the generalized types were revealed.

In-Depth Interviews Total of ten (10) in-depth interviews were conducted within the project, the goal of which was the same as in the case of the group discussions: identifying the criteria that determines the quality legal education, as well as identification of the coherence between the supply of the legal degree holders and the demand of the requirements of the labor market. The in-depth interviews were composed of the following respondents: 1. Court representatives; 2. Prosecution representatives;

20Â Â

3. Private sector representatives; The in-depth interviews were conducted for enriching the results of the group discussions. The interviews were conducted simultaneously with the group discussions. The duration of the interview: approx. 40 min. The interviews were recorded in the audito format. The recordings were processed and included in the qualitative component of the research.

Geographic entities

Court representatives/

Prosecution representatives

Private sector Number of representatives the discussions

judges Tbilisi

Batumi (Constitutional Court)

Number of the 5 discussions

8 2

1.2.2. Quantitative Component of the Research

In the project on the research of the quality of the higher legal education in Georgia, the quantitative component has a special significance. The quantitative research has allowed to evaluate to what extent the higher educational entities in Georgia ensure provision of the quality education to the bachelors, masters and doctorate students. Selection: The selection type was the multistage stratified random sampling among the bachelors, masters, doctors, professors/lecturers and administration representatives of the legal faculties of the higher education entities in Georgia. The selection design included regional specifics, the level of education and bachelors students. Research Instrument: questionnaire Research Method: face-to-face interview Students: approximately 1â&#x20AC;&#x2122;000 completed interviews (conducting such an number of interviews was caused by the need to receive the representative data per sub-groups of the main target group).

21Â Â

Professors/lecturers and faculty administration: approximately 350 completed interviews. In total, the quantity of the sample amounted to 1’350 interviews. The higher education entity is the Primary Sampling Unit. The selection of the higher education entities was targeted. Total of 15 higher education entities were selected throughout Georgia. The universities (higher education entities) are: Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Ilia State University, Georgian-American University (GAU), Grigol Robakidze University, Sulkhan-Saba Teaching University, Technical University of Georgia, Tbilisi Independent University “Gorgasali”, Sokhumi State University, Caucasus International University, University of Georgia, Batumi Shota Rustaveli State University, Kutaisi Akaki Tsereteli University, International Black Sea University, Free University, Caucasus University. The legal faculty was the Secondary Sampling Unit. The Final Sampling Units were: a) student; b) professor/lecturer and the representative of high-level administration/dean’s office. The selection of the students was conducted through the random systematic sampling. The selection interval among the students was the total number of students divided by the selection sample (for example, if total of 200 students study at the faculty and there are 20 students to be interviewed, the interval will be – every tenth student). An additional list was formed. For the selected sample, the margin of error does not exceed 3.1% with the 99% confidence level. Training of the Interviewers and Supervisors Following creation of the final version of the questionnaire and identifying the selection, the analyst of the Institute of Social Studies and Analysis has introduced the questionnaire and the selection type to the interviewers and the supervisors. The supervisor for each region has trained the interviewers at the local level. Supervising the Field Works During the quantitative component of the research a special attention was paid to supervising the field works. 10% of the conducted interviews underwent the mentioned supervision; the interviews were selected randomly and so that the work of an each interviewer was covered. Entering the Data and Analysis During the field works the statistician of the Social Research and Analysis Institute has created a data grid through the data analysis program – SPSS. Sumultaneously with the field works, the procedure of entering the data to the data grid started after conducting 30% of the interviews. Each open-ended question of the questionnaire underwent so-called “coding”.

Data Analysis: At the first stage of the data analysis the statistician has cleaned the data. At the next stage, the data was statistically processed. The the data, received as a result of the research, was analyzed through the following methods: onedimensional frequency distribution, cross-tabulation, correlation, regression, factorial and cluster analysis methods. 1.2.3. Demographic Profile of the Research

The research had four target groups – bachelors, masters’ and doctorate students that study in various universities of Georgia at the law/legal faculties, as well as the professors/lecturers that teach at the relevant faculties. The majority of the interviewed students were female. The exception is the doctorate students, where the gender distribution is equal. An absolute majority of the bachelor students are aged from 19 to 22, of masters students – from 22 to 24, while majority of the doctorate students are aged from 25 to 30. One third of the bachelor students are in the second year of study, one third is in the third year of study and almost one third – in the fourth year of study. More than half of them evaluated their academic performance as good. 37,5% of them specialize in law studies, approximately the same number of students have not chosen the specialization yet. The majority of the interviewed masters students are in their first year of study. 45.9% of them evaluate their academic performance as good and 32.9% as very good. One fourth of them specialize in private law, 24% specialize in criminal law, while 15.1% specialize in civil law. 40.4% of the doctorate students are in their second year of study, 38.5% are in their third year of study, 19.2% are in the first year of study and 1.9% are in their fourth year of study. The majority evaluates their academic performance as very good (excellent). More than one-third of them specialize in private law, 15.4% specialize in criminal law and 11.5% specialize in expertise and the same number specializes in law studies (see table #1). Table #1 Demographic Profile Gender Age

Female Male Up to 20 year old 20-22 year old 23-25 year old 25-30 year old

Bachelor Students 62,0% 38,0% 43,1% 50,9% 5,1% 0,9%

Masters Students 61,6% 38,4% 24,7% 65,1% 9,6%

Doctorate Students 50,0% 50,0% 1,9% 1,9% 15,4% 57,7%

More than 30 Major Academic Very good/excellent Performance Good Average Satisfactory Refuse to Answer Specialization Private Law Public Law Criminal Law Law Studies International Law Constitutional Law Civil Law General Lawyer Business Engineering (Law) Lawyer Law History/Theory Expertise Law of Obligations Banking Insurance Law Has not selected yet

0,1% 21,3% 51,4% 22,6% 3,3% 1,4% 5,6% 0,7% 8,0% 37,5% 2,8% 0,1% 5,1% 0,1%

0,7% 32,9% 45,9% 19,2% 2,1% 25,3% 6,2% 24,0% 12,3% 3,4% 15,1% -

23,1% 64,7% 27,5% 5,9% 2,0% 34,6% 5,8% 15,4% 11,5% 1,9% 1,9% 7,7% 1,9%

0,4%

2,1%

0,1% 0,4% 0,2%

7,5% 1,4%

1,9% 11,5% 3,8%

0,7%

38,9%

2,1%

1,9%

As for the professors/lecturers, their demographic profile is the following: 53.3% is male, 37.2% is inbetween 31 and 40 years old, 20.5% is inbetween 23 and 30 years old, 20.5% is inbetween 40 and 50 years old, 15.5% is inbetween 50 and 60 years old and the number of those, who are above 60 years old is 6.3%. The academic status of the 26.3% of the professors/lecturers is an Associated Professor, of the 21.6% - Assistant-Professor, and of the 18.8% - Full Professor. Majority of them teach at the bachelors’ level. Apart from teaching in the university, almost 40% have practiced law but do not work anymore. Approximately the same number practice law currently. More than one fifth has never practiced law. For those who have practiced/practice law, the field of work was/is the civil law (23.4%), human rights (20.7%), public law (16.6%) and private law (16.3%) (see. Table #2). Table #2 Demographic Profile Gender Age

Female Male 23-30 years old

Professors/ Lecturers 46,7% 53,3% 20,5%

31-40 years old 41-50 years old 51-60 years old More than 60 Academic Status Full Professor Associated Professor Assistant Professor Invited Professor Does not have Experience of teaching Up to 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years 21-25 years 26 and more years Scientific and academic Academic Doctor status Doctor of Sciences Does not have academic/scientific status Do you work or have worked I work currently as a practicing lawyer? I have worked, but I do not work now I have never worked as a practicing lawyer What is your field of Civil Law specialization? Public Law Human Rights Administrative/Constitutional Law Private Law Criminal Law Labour Law Tax Law Competition Law Constitutional Law Criminology International Law Law Theory Banking Law

37,2% 20,5% 15,5% 6,3% 18,8% 26,3% 21,6% 16,9% 16,3% 5,6% 28,8% 21,3% 13,5% 11,0% 9,7% 10,0% 35,2% 20,0% 44,8% 38,2% 39,5% 22,3% 23,4% 16,6% 20,7% 2,0% 16,3% 5,4% 1,4% 5,8% 2,0% 1,4% 1,0% 0,7% 2,7% 0,7%

25Â Â

2. Overview of the International Legal Education System 2.1. About the Overview As it was mentioned in the previous chapter, one of the most important components of the legal education quality research in Georgia was the review of the international education system. Unfortunately, due to the lack of human resources and time, it was not possible to conduct comprehensive, independent research of the international legal education system. Instead, the existing research papers were analyzed. Therefore, the research team has conducted so-called „Desk Research“. The main goal of this review was to support the process of determining measurable variables for evaluating the legal education quality. Therefore, during the work, especial attention was paid to the criteria, applied by foreign countries to evaluate the legal education quality. The review did not aim at identifying the model, best suited for Georgia. To achieve the set objective, the research team has examined the legal education system of the 11 countries. During the selection of a country, the research group has emphasized on some of the major factors, such as: geographical location, legal culture, uniqueness of the higher legal education system. Considering these factors, the following countries were selected: the United States of America, Canada, England, Germany, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Lithuania, Czech Republic and Poland. This way, the research team has tried to more or less cover America, as well as the Western, Central and Eastern regions of Europe, while at the same time covering Anglo-Saxon and continental law countries, to also focus on the post-communist countries, the political and legislative systems of which are undergoing the transitional period. On the one hand, the research group has reviewed the practice of those countries, which have joined the Bologna process; on the other hand, the research group has reviewed the countries which have decided to develop their higher legal education system beyond that process. Naturally, not all of the examined countries are viewed as an example of the successful model of the higher legal education system; however, the researchers were also interested in the factors that hindered some countries in transforming and developing the educational system. Therefore, identification of the quality determinants, tools for measuring the success of the legal education system and adapting them to the context of Georgia have become the basis for creating the discussion guideline, which has played an important role in determining the variables for measuring the legal education quality. Naturally, the research team had acknowledged that perhaps, the real environment in some of the countries might radically differ from the research papers and documents examined. Therefore, the research team has focused on such a quality-determining criteria that are valid in any case and that define the quality of a higher legal education, regardless of the environment in a given country.

2.2. Quality Determinants of a Legal Education When speaking of identification of the legal education determinants based on the analysis of the foreign higher education system, it should be taken into consideration that there is no universal model of a quality education that would have been applicable to all types of countries or universities. During the analysis the research team had to examine the education models that are essentially different and all of them have their advantages and disadvantages. For example, we may compare the educational systems of the US and Belgium, which radically differ from each other; however, this does not mean that either of those educational systems are weak or unable to provide quality education. The same is true in case of comparing the higher legal educational systems of Germany and Switzerland. The higher legal education system of Germany is much more conservative than the system of the Switzerland. The nature of state intervention in the university education differs as well; however, both systems have both advantages and disadvantages. It would not be appropriate to unequivocally say that one system is better than the other. Therefore, while thinking of the quality of a higher legal education, the research team has tried to generalize the variables that unconditionally define the quality of a higher legal education system. Such variables are:   

Legislative mechanisms of regulating a higher legal education; Mechanisms for elaborating higher legal education standards and regulations; nature of communication among a state and a higher education entity; Flexibility of a higher legal education system, which in its turn, includes such components as the multitute of the optional subjects, interdisciplinary nature, academic personnel and relevance of the subjects with the tendencies existing in a country.

2.2.1. Legislative Mechanisms of Regulating a Higher Legal Education

As it was revealed through the analysis of the foreign practices, the countries that we selected pay special attention to the legislative regulation of a higher legal education. Although, in some of the countries, for example, in Germany, the state intervenes in a higher legal education system much more1 than in other countries, but for the research it is more important that the proper regulative mechanisms exist institutionally and normatively, rather than the level of the state intervention. This was clearly reflected not only in the case of Germany, but also in the process of reviewing the higher legal education sysyems in Czech Republic, Belgium, Swirzerland, US and other countries. The monitoring mechanisms over the higher education quality are elaborated in Switzerland and are protected under the federal constitution of the country, according to which, both the confederation, as well as the cantons, exercise an oversight over the education quality2, within their competences.

1 2

Harvard Law School, P. o. (2011). The German Legal Profession. President and Fellows of Harvard College. https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/mwikis/eurydice/index.php/Suisse:Assurance_qualit%C3%A9

The Netherlands was the first country which created an institutional mechanism for evaluating education and research. Starting from the 1980-ies, the system was elaborated, according to which the education facilities were given a broad autonomy, under the condition that the state would have been informed of the quality of the education that they provide to their students. This policy was first introduced in 1983, in relation to the research programs, as a policy for the conditional financing3. In this system, the higher educational facilities themselves have the leading role in the process of the monitoring the education quality. In the US, the state, on the one hand, tries to distance itself from the legal education system, to ensure its maximum independence through less intervention; while on the other hand, the state tries to establish a so-called mono-centrist standard of an education. It is interesting that for achieving this goal, the state delegates the regulatory functions to the American Bar Association (ABA)4, which from the moment of its establishment, that is, from 1878, works towards improvement of the legal education in a country. As for Germany, as already mentioned, the level of the state intervention in the education system regulation is high. Practically all of the details are regulated under the state legislation. Since the major focus is made on the court5, the legal education system of Germany may be thought of as a part of the general justice policy6. In such an environment the law faculties of higher education facilities have very little capacity to make independent decisions; however, as a result of the 2002 reform their discretion has comparatively increased. All of the above cases show different norms of regulating an educational system; however, at the same time all of the cases show a well-formed, institutionally operable mechanisms, which in any case positively affect the quality of a higher legal education. As for the form of regulation, the level of the state involvement and the level of discretion of the higher educational entities, according to the opinion of the researchers, these components should be evaluated individually case-by-case. Direct implementation of the foreign practices in the context of Georgia is not advisable; however, in any case, whatever the national regulation mechanism of the legal education will be, it will have a tremendous impact on the quality of a higher legal education in the country. For these reasons, according to the recommendation of the researchers, one of the topics of the discussions with the target groups should be the ways of legislative regulation of a higher legal education. 2.2.2. Communication Form among a State and a Higher Educational Facility

Since the legislative mechanisms of regulation have a significant impact upon a higher education qiality, the researchers were interested to examine the ways in which those mechanisms are 3

http://www.utwente.nl/mb/cheps/research/higher_education_monitor/2007countryreportnl.pdf ABA. (2012). ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools 2012-2013. (გვ. 1-169). ABA Section of Legal Education and Bar Admission. 5 The higher educational institutions in Germany prepare students in accordance with the professional standards of a judge profession. 6 Hariolf Wenzler, K. K. (2012). Educating the Global Lawyer: The German Experience. Journal of Legal Education, 462-467. 4

elaborated. Specifically, what is the role of higher legal education facilities and a state in this process? What is the form of communication among higher educaiton facilities and a state? To what extent are the parties to the process engaged in elaboration of regulations and standards? The analysis of the foreign practices has shown that the more the interested parties of the process are engaged in the regulation of a higher legal education, the more effective are the standards and regulation mechanisms. The US is a brilliant example of the above. In the US, as already mentioned, the state delegates the regulatory functions to the American Bar Association. According to the journal “Issues of Democracy” publicized by the US State Department, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional union in the world, which, by the year 2002 united up to 400’000 members, among others, 350’000 lawyers. The rest of the members of the organization are the judges, court lawyers, prosecutors, public servants, and other persons exercising legal profession. According to the current data, the American Bar Association unites 50% of the lawyers, practicing in the US. Starting from 1952 the council, operating under the auspices of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar of the American Bar Association was officially recognized by the US education department as the body, authorized to accredit the doctorate (J.D.) educational programs.7 The major advantage of such an institutional regulation is that the organization, which represents the major defender of the professional interests of lawyers, operating in any field throughout the country, and at the same time, unites almost half of those lawyers, is itself authorized to define the professional standards, the compliance with which will be mandatory for its own members. Therefore, instead of the regulations being enforced by the government (the implementation of which might damage a legal profession in any form), there is a package of standards elaborated by the lawyers themselves, which regulates high quality of legal education, as well as the professional ethics and norms of conduct. Almost all of the representatives of the legal profession are involved in introduction of the regulations. In terms of elaboration of the higher legal education standards and regulations, the researchers got interested in the practices of Canada, where there are almost none of the centralized mechanisms of regulating legal education. Since Canada has no federal minister of education, a higher education is covered under the authority of the provinces and at the same time, the universities enjoy broad autonomy. In Canada, there are different mechanisms of ensuring quality in each province. For example, let us have a look at the practices existing in Ontario. Majority of the universities have their own laws. Each entity exists independently and defines itself the policy of admission and education, creates programs, hires academic personnel, etc. None of the 7

ABA. (2012). ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools 2012-2013. (გვ. 1-169). ABA Section of Legal Education and Bar Admission.

law provisions provide the accountability procedures or mechanisms for ensuring the quality of the educational programs. In Ontario, the Ontario Universities’ Quality Council is responsible for the quality of the programs in the public universities. The Council has elaborated the framework for ensuring the quality. The framework entails examination of all of the programs of all the levels, once every eight (8) years. During the examination, the Council considers the following: whether the program complies with the mission of a university and an academic plan; whether the program requirements and the knowledge, received from the education are clear and of relevant quality; whether the curriculum reflects the level of the development of the field (discipline) at the time of examination of a program; the innovative and creative approaches are applied during the creation of the program content; the student evaluation and expectations are relevant af effective; use of physical and financial resources are relevant and effective; the size of a class, number of the lectures conducted by the permanent and temporary professors; number of the successful students and diplomas; initiatives for quality improvement and other.8 In terms of the engagement of the interested parties in the elaboration of the standards and regulation mechanisms of the higher legal education, the higher legal education system of France is notable. In 2007, the Agency for Research and Evaluation of a Higher Education was created. The Agency is an independent administrative body. The agency is chaired by the Council, composed of 25 members. Its members are scientists, researchers and two members of parliament. The Agency evaluates research and higher education facilities, as well as the research centers existing within those facilities, education programs of higher education institutions and the diplomas. The Agency has elaborated the evaluation charter. The charter defines fundamental principles that ensure the quality evaluation of higher education. Specifically, the evaluation is conducted impartially and objectively, which is ensured by the independence of the Agency and evaluators, with the competence of the experts. The evaluation is conducted based on the respect towards the evaluated institutions and through holding dialogues. The evaluation is conducted effectively, through the methodology, adjusted according to the specifics of an evaluated institution. The Agency is not an accreditation body, because the accreditation is issued by the state in France. However, the state issues accreditation based on the conclusion (evaluation) of the Agency. Therefore, there is no direct link between the state and the evaluated institution. An outside body, the Agency, which is independent and autonomous, issues an objective conclusion, which the state relies upon. In this case it is important to consider that the main principles of evaluation of higher educational facilities (not only in relation to the legal discipline, but in general) are elaborated by the 8

http://www.cicic.ca/525/Pratiques.canada; http://oucqa.ca/framework/4-3-evaluation-criteria-3/

representatives of the academic circles, which naturally supports an effectiveness of the mentioned institutions. Despite the fact that the higher legal education system of Poland deserves critique in a number of aspects,9 the mechanism of elaborating the education standard is notable. Although the law schools in Poland enjoy high level of autonomy, the standards are elaborated by the Minister of Education and Science. The annual congress of the deans of legal faculties send a minister the proposal package, relating to the standards of a higher legal education. Such an institutional form is interesting because it creates a link between a higher educational facility and a state. Whether this mechanism functions properly in a real context is a separate issue. As we noted above, the researchers lacked the possibility to practically verify the information indicated in the written sources. Due to the above it is clear that the effective mechanisms of elaboration of the regulative norms and standards are essential for the inmprovement of the quality of a higher legal education. Therefore, this issue was also included in the list of the topics for the planned discussions with the target groups. 2.2.3. Flexibility of the Legal Education System

During the analysis of a higher legal education system, one more factor was identified, which significantly determines the quality of a higher legal education in an any given country. That factor is the flexibility of a higher legal education, which includes such components as the: multitude of the optional subjects and interdisciplinarity, coherence of the subjects with the existing reality (whether the subjects are up to date). It is notable that the mentioned components differed even in those countries, which are part of the common education system; specifically, the countries that are part of the the Bologna process. The practices of those countries are interesting, because, despite being part of the Bologna process, some of them refuse to integrate into this system of a higher legal education. The examined materials give the possibility to conclude that the countries that especially emphasize upon the higher legal education, focus on the implementation of the contemporary tendencies and education methods, as well as on the coherence of the country’s needs with the existing educational system. One of the major measurements of the flexibility of an educational system is the multitude of the optional subjects and interdisciplinary nature. In this case, it is less important whether the state interferes in regulating a higher legal education system or the extent to which the legislation is strict. For the demonstration, we will overview the two absolutely different systems – French and German. Of these two, France is part of the Bologna process, while Germany has refused to integrate its higher legal education system into the Bologna process.

In a given country the USSR 5-year educational system is practically unchanged. The university has human resource problems, the effectiveness of distance learning is low, etc.

Prior to France joining the Bologna process, the higher legal education systems of France and Germany were very similar10. Specifically, French universities were obliged to comply with the state-established frameworks for the university programs, for example, the law program should have had the same features across the country, regardless of which university had offered the program. The 2007 law on the freedom and responsibility of universities has recognized the autonomy of universities. The universities have a great freedom to define the study programs, their content, to make decisions on establishing or closing the subsidiaries11. For a more clarity, we can review an example of the Pantheon Assas University12 and its educational program, where, at the first stage of education, along with the mandatory subjects, there is a possibility of studying additional subjects, such as: law history, instances of law, contemporary economic problems13, international relations, political sciences, history of institutions and law, history of contemporary politics, history of the property law, introduction to the media law, commercial law, history of the social and political institutions in the antique epoch, history of the law of obligations, state finances, general principles of the European law, management and accounting an enterprise, introduction to the communication law, labor law, history of the family law, history of the commercial law, administrative disputes, history of administrative law, law philosophy, legal system of Germany, property law, etc. This inomplete list of the optional subjects reflects the efforts of the higher legal educational system of France to give the students a broad knowledge, of both the legal sciences and the relating disciplines, which will allow the perfection of the received legal knowledge; this, naturally, positively affects the process of students becoming professionals. As for the German system of a higher legal education, despite being conservative, despite the high level of state intervention and the strictness of the regulations, it is also aimed at giving students diversified education to ensure that they become accomplished professionals. As already mentioned, in Germany, the legal education is regarded as part of the justice policy, therefore it is regulated under the federal Act on the Justice14. Part 2 of the section “5-a” of the mentioned legislative norm provides a list of those fields of law that are mandatory to study during the first year of education. Those are: civil law, criminal law, public law and process (procedural) law, as well as the link of those legal disciplines with the European law, law science methodology, its phylosophic, historical and social basis. As for the optional subjects, law does not strictly regulate it, however, it says that the areas of specialization must serve deepening of the knowledge of the mandatory disciplines and support their perception in interdisciplinary and international aspects. Hence, the law does not provide a list of the optional

10 What is meant is the fact that the higher educational institutions were obliged to abide by the state-prescribed frames prescribed in both countries and to offer students uniform educational programs. 11 http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/accreditamento_francia_fr.pdf 12 Université Panthéon Assas Paris II 13 http://www.u-paris2.fr/2110L/0/fiche___ueup/ 14 The German Judiciary Act. (2012). Saarbrücken, Germany: Federal Ministry of Justice, juris GmbH.

subjects, but practically defines the spheres, from which the subjects must be offered. Desoute such regulations, higher educational institutions maintain a certain amount of discretion and the best example of implementing this discretion is the only private higher educational facility existing in Germany – the Bucerius University. For the research team, the education model, elaborated by this university was very interesting; this model may be considered as the future of the higher legal education in Germany. The article (“Education of a Global Lawyer, German Experience”), published in the third (3rd) number of the edition #61 of the “Journal of Legal Education” discusses this model. The mentioned university mainly focuses on not only providing diversified legal education, but also aims at developing the students’ deep and complex capacity to perceive international legal, political and economic context. Bucerius University pays great attention to the international, especially European (EU) and AngloAmerican business law. The most important stages of education, especially the start and the end are conducted in small groups, in which the students have all possibilities to engage in the process of a lecture at maximum. Therefore, the lecturers have a maximum feedback. One of the distinguishing features from other German universities is that in Bucerius the students complete the first stage of education in three years. Since the education program’s structure and the process of study in the university envisage three years, it is naturally very uncommon to the rest of the higher educational facilities in Germany, where the first stage of the education is comparatively longer and envisages four (4) years. The Bucerius University established the trimester educational system, which is also uncommon for the rest of the German Universities, where the study process is based on the semester structure. Such an approach aims at making the educational program flexible and diverse. One of the important preconditions for admission to the university is the fluent knowledge of the English language. The study curriculum foresees one mandatory semester abroad in any case. The credits are being recognized and counted within the main educational program. At the same time, the Bucerius University students study minimum of one more legal system apart from the German system (for example, Anglo-Saxon legal system). Bucerius University has a unique, fourth-year preparatory program, which significantly assists the students in improving the final exam results. In addition, an intensive foreign language program is mandatory; students have to choose one of the following languages: French, Russian, Chineze or Spanish. At the ninth stage of studying the language, the students undergo the exams, as a result of which they receive internationally-recognized certificate in legal English or legal French languages. Apart from the mentioned, the Bucerius University is unique because it incorporates the principles of economics and business curriculum into its law education program. The Business and Economics’ course is represented in Bucerius University by one of the lead business schools in Germany – WHU (Otto Beisheim School of Management). The mentioned programs are adjusted

according to the special needs of the law students and therefore concentrate on the decision making process, organizational structures, management theories, firm and corporation theories, finances as well as the functioning of the markets. Especial attention is paid to the economic capacity of law, as well as studying the national economics and issues relating to taxes and fiscal system. Bucerius educational program includes two mandatory internships, each lasting for three (3) months. As a rule, the students undergo internships at the lead corporations and legal firms, both inside the country, as well as outside the country. Apart from the mentioned, the practitioners permanently meet the students. So-called Studium Professionale also operates within the university, within the frames of which the students take courses in the disciplines, such as: rhetoric, trainings of interviews with employees, trainings of interrogating witnesses, etc. Apart from that, the extra-curricular program operates in the university – the Studium Generale, within the frames of which the students undergo the non-legal courses to receive an additional knowledge, apart from the mandatory program. Within the frames of the given program the students study history, political sciences, philosophy, principles of economics, human rights and art, make research on the fundamental issues of the humanity, science and society. The program Philosophicum offers students annual lectures and two additional courses. The students that complete the course are authorized to receive academic certificates in philosophy, which enriches the degree received as a result of completing the first stage of the education – so called LL.B; at the same time, this is being considered at the state exams. In addition to the rest it should also be considered that the Bucerius University is the only German university, with which the agreements by the higher educational institutions on the exchange programs are accepted by the American Bar Association. The similar approaches are reflected in the experience of other European countries examined by the research team. For example, the analysis of the higher legal education in Switzerland shows that the optional subhects are mainly determined so that they deepen the knowledge, received under the major disciplines. For an example, we can review the practice of the Geneve University, where the first stage of the education offers the following optional courses: law of arts and cultural property, law of construction and residence, sports law, international criminal law, law of Rome – principles of private law, history of political and legal thinking, introduction to criminology, law of intellectual property and competition, European civil law, constitutional law (according to the selected topics), social insurance law, international and comparative tax law, international humanitarian law, competition law of Switzerland, history of legal and political thinking 2, international institutions and development of international law, enterprise in the legal and political perspective, creating agreements. As the discussed precedents show, the higher legal education system of the leading European countries aims at giving students such an education in law, which is coherent with the economic

model of a country, with the existing legal requirements, regional context and international challenges. In this regard, along with the European, the US higher legal education system is interesting as well; the US system is characterized by an extremely high level of subject specialization and flexibility of the study programs. For example, in the context of the 2008 economic crises, in 2009 in the New York University law school the new subject appears – “the crises of the 2008”, and the “world economic crises” in Yale University. Higher educational facilities offer students the programs that are directly derived from the specifics of the US. For example, in the context of the close economic cooperation among the US and Japan, the Michigan University offered its students the special course on Japanese legislation. The New York university law school offers an entire cycle of courses on Chinese legal and financial system: “regulating international complex disputes with China”, “introduction to the legal and state structure of China”, “international business and investment agreements with China”, etc. Due to the US interests in the Middle East, a number of US universities offer students special programs on Islamic law. For example: “gender problems in Islamic law”, “power and law in Islamic world” (New York University), “Islamic law” (Michigan University), “Introduction to Muslim law” (Harvard University). Apart from the states that have a long history, sometimes, centuries of traditions in higher legal education, the research team took an interest in practice of the post-communist countries, which gained an independence, practically, alongside Georgia and underwent the same transitional period as the Georgia is facing today. In this regard, the experience of the Baltic region is interesting. Although the higher legal educational system of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are far from perfection, there are interesting nuances, which are worth focusing on. The practices of the Riga15 law school are interesting; on the one hand, it is an exceptional education facility in the region, while on the other hand it is very popular among the students from Georgia, which is why the research team has chosen to examine this university during the overview of the practices of the Baltic region. The mentioned educational entity offers students the bachelors’ programs in two directions: 1.

Law and business;

Law and diplomacy;

The first direction includes the topics that cover an international law, as well as the comparative law of the EU and the subjects that relate to the theory of economics, finances, marketing and management.

The information on the mentioned educational institutions is take from the official websites of those institutions http://www.rgsl.edu.lv/en/study-at-rgsl/bachelor-programmes/bachelor-overview/ (accessed on February 14, 2014).

The mentioned direction covers all of the legal disciplines, necessary for the degree of bachelor of law; however, at the same time, these subjects are taught from the transnational perspective. The focus is made on the link between the law and business. As for the law and diplomacy direction, it includes law, economics and the main issues of the international relations. Such a complex program was elaborated by the Riga law school and Latvia University for those, who plan to make a career in diplomacy, as well as to work in the NGO sector, in the international organizations and in media. As demonstrated in this case, the program is not oriented to prepare professionals for the specifically legal spheres; however, it covers the legal disciplines and the students that have completed the course have a possibility to continue an education in the law discipline at the masters level (LLM), as well as in the international law or European law. As for the masters’ programs of the mentioned educational entities, they are quite diverse. The Riga Law School offers interested persons the masters’ program in international and European law, in law and finances, in legal linguistics, in international public law and human rights, in trans-border commercial law, in the EU law and politics. As demonstrated in this case case, the masters programs, just like the bachelors’ programs go beyond the general legal framework, which on the one hand may represent an attempt of the complex teaching of the law, while on another hand, such a model of teaching is attractive for foreign students. This is confirmed by the fact that the study language in those directions is English. Due to all of the above, it is clear that the flexibility of the higher legal education is one of the central determinants of its quality. In this case, what is important is – how does a specific country harmonize the education system with the existing regional or international context, how coherent is the education system with the social and economic system of a country, whether the educational system responds to the challenges, such as democratic transition, reforming economic and political systems, etc. Therefore, this topic was considered to be appropriate to be included in the discussion list.

3. Overview of the Regulatory Normative Base of the Legal Education System in Georgia For comprehensively defining the determinants of the quality of the higher legal education in Georgia, simultaneously with the overview of the foreign practices, the research group conducted analysis of the normative base, regulating the legal education system in Georgia. The mentioned process was conducted in two stages. At the first stage, the legislative acts of Georgia were examined, while at the second stage, the research has covered the internal regulatory documents of the examined higher legal education facilities, specifically, study program and syllabuses.

This process was important since it has revealed the determinants of the higher legal education quality according to the normative base of Georgia. It created the possibility of comparing it with the foreign analogs and use it in the process of discussions with the target group.

3.1. Overview of the Legislative Acts Since there is no special legal act that would regulate the quality of a legal education, except for the “Document of the Sector Characteristics” discussed in the first chapter of the report, the examination of the normative base, regulating the higher legal education system in Georgia has covered all of the laws and bylaws that regulate higher education, education quality, accreditation and authorization process in Georgia. Apart from that, the legislative amendment package, concepts and other field document projects, prepared in the recent period by varioys NGO or governmental sector representatives (but majority of which were not enacted or implemented due to various reasons) were examined. A significant part of the overview is dedicated to the process of licensing the legal work, state regulations and established procedures that are necessary for holding various positions. The conclusive part presents all of the important factors, which affect the quality of the legal education and requires an especial attention from the state. Overview of the legislative acts may be formally divided into the following parts:     

Reform; Accreditation and authorization; Structure and management of the higher educational entities; Regulated professions; Factors, affecting quality of a legal profession.

3.1.1. Reform

At the end of the 2004, the reform of the education system of Georgia has started; the parliament of Georgia has enacted legislative acts, the financing and governance structure of higher educational entities has changed; in addition it should be mentioned that from the outset, the questions have arisen relating to the consistence of the reform and particular fears were expressed. Specifically, the first legislative amendment was enacted on December 21, 2004 to the law on the “higher education”, while the law on “general education” was adopted in 2005. Despite the shortcomings, contradictions and a rush, the reform fundamentally changed an entire system, the structure of higher educational facilities was formed anew, the elected governance bodies were introduced, the rules of financinfg have changed and the number of pulils and students has become an orientation for determining the financing; the higher educational facilities were accredited; however, one of the largest gains of the reform was minimizing the corruption in the educational system, introducing uniform national exams. The report of the Transparency International – Georgia reads: “these exams have clearly shown us that there is a possibility to

conduct open and fair selection competition throughout Georgia. This well-organized process must become an example for other ongoing reforms in the country.”16 Considering that the goal of this research is to evaluate the higher legal education quality, we will emphasize on only those aspects of the reform that had an impact on formation of the higher legal education as it is now.

3.1.2. Accreditation/Authorization

Within the overview of the accreditation and authorization, the process itself and the regulatory normative base were analyzed in detail. The analysis process has revealed a number of problematic aspects; according to the research team, an especial attention should be paid to the issue of the conflict of interest among the members of the expert group and the university, interested in gaining an accreditation/authorization. The legislation provides that a member of an accreditation/authorization expert group should himself/herself declare declination in case of a conflict of interest. The accreditation seeker (educational entity) can also challenge the expert group through submitting an application within two (2) days after the receipt of an individual-administrative act17. The Ordinance #99/n of the Minister of Education and Science of Georgia (dated October 1, 2010) on the “Confirming the Statute and the Fee for Authorization of Educational Facilities” provides that for the purposes of the Ordinance, the “conflict of interest” will be confirmed if the specific circumstances exist (as described under the Article 92 of the General Administrative Code of Georgia). Specifically, the conflict of interest exists, if an expert: a) is himself/herself an interested party to a case; b) is a relative of an interested party (or his/her relative) participating in the case (relative of direct line: spouse, siblings of a spouse; siblings of a relative of direct ascent; siblings, their spouses and children). b) is a representative of an interested party participating in the case; c) is an expert on the given issue; d) is in a labour relations with an interested party to a case; e) himself/herself or his/her family members own shares or share capital of the entity, which is an interested party; f) is a family member of an interested party or of his/her representative to the case.

www.trasnparency.ge After payment of the fee, the center issues individual administrative-legal act on creation of an accreditation/authorization expert group and on the visit to the institution, seeking an accreditation/authorization. 17

Despite a rather lengthy list on the conflict of interest, which is clearly a positive fact, there is still a risk that there might be a deal among an authorization/accreditation group member and the authorization/accreditation seeker – for example, offering employment at a higher educational entity in exchange for granting the status. It would be preferable to make a reservation clause, saying that the authorization/accreditation group member will not have a possibility to establish labor relations with the status-seeker within a specific period from the moment of accreditation/authorization. Such a clause will allow to not only avoid a conflict of interest on the outset, but also to exclude any type of interest from a member of an expert group, in terms of future employment perspective. Apart from the mentioned, the rule of composing an accreditation council bears certain risks as well. In this regard, the experts have different views. Part of the expert group members considers that the incumbent rule of composing a council allows making covert deals or having influence over the council decision for putting a competitor institution in unfavorable position. Although, this opinion is not directly confirmed, but it is preferable to change the rules of composing an accreditation council in such a way that minimizes any risk.

3.1.3. Structure and Management of Higher Educational Entities

Within the overview of the bylaws regulating higher educational system in Georgia, it was interesting to evaluate whether the operation of the Services for Ensuring Quality were effective in the examined universities. Some of the universities have uploaded the report of their activities, researches and questionnaires filled out by students to their university web-sites; however, it is clear that the main information is outdated. There is a tendency that state universities upload much more information in this regard, than private entities do. The private universities mainly just indicate in their statute that they have a Quality Department or a specific employee that is responsible for the quality of the education. In this regard, it is preferable, on the one hand, that the universities upload a more up-to-date and comprehensive information to their websites, and on the other hand, it is preferable that private universities upload the information that reflects activities of a quality department. Undoubtedly, prestigious private universities conduct quality control, which is the precondition for the prestige of these universities; this is why it would be good if they shared their experience in this regard. In some cases, the information is unavailable or is only available in a foreign language. It should also be noted that there is not systematic regulation of quality department operation. The only document that establishes certain methodology in this regard is the Ordinance #188 of the director of the legal entity of public law – Education Quality Development National Center on the “Confirming the Recommendations on Authorization of Higher Educational Entities”. In addition, individual universities have elaborated internal documents on the evaluation of an educational process; however, nothing is mentioned of the frequency – how often should the researches and inspections be conducted, etc.

Undoubtedly, creation of elected bodies, student engagement in both electing and governing process and creation of the separate entity for ensuring quality are positive features of the system established under the reform. 3.1.4. Regulated Professions

One of the novelties of the reform is the chapter 12 of the law on higher education; the chapter includes provisions on the professions that are regulated by the state in Georgia. According to the law, such professions include: a) legal profession; b) medical profession; c) pedagogical. The term itself “Regulated Profession” is interpreted in the law as a list of professions, which require higher academic education and passing the certification exams. It is stressed, that only the state is authorized to define such professions. It is a positive fact that the legal profession is included in the list of regulated professions; the provision saying that: “the rules and conditions of state certification examination for the regulated professions are defined under the relevant legislation” is an especially positive fact. Therefore, there is an expectation that the state will introduce the law on legal education. In 2002, prior to the enactment of the education system reform, the sub-commission was created within the commission on reform of the law-enforcement and security bodies of Georgia; the subcommission was chaired by (at that time incumbent Minister of Justice) Roland Grigalashvili. The sub-commission has prepared the “concept of the law on the legal education” that was publicized by the first Deputy Minister of Justice (at that time) – Kote Kublashvili on June 24, 2002. In the interview, given to the “Radio Tavisupleba”, Kote Kublashvili says: “the university education is necessary for a lawyer. However, everyone agrees that this is never enough. After the education, a person must receive something additional, to become a real lawyer. If in the future we become close to the membership (of the EU – author’s note), we will not need to change much in our legislation in this regard, if this concept will further be transformed into the draft law and if it will be implemented in reality.”18 “the main cornerstone of the concept is the qualification exam. After completion of a higher education the person, wishing to become a lawyer, will be given a document, confirming his/her legal education and for the purpose of receiving the qualification of a lawyer, he/she will have to pass a special exam. In addition, the higher school of justice will be created, the completion of which will be equal to passing the qualification exams. The specialists, not having the qualification, but having legal education, will have a possibility to work in private and science sectors.” On October 10, 2005, the draft law on the “legal education”, under the authorship of parliament member Nino Kalandadze (draft #07-6/373) has entered the parliament of Georgia. The draft law was very interesting and it included the new way of regulating such issues as pre-university legal education, university and post-university education; introduction of three-stage education and establishing the certification exams. According to the draft law: 18

http://www.radiotavisupleba.ge/content/article/1521618.html

“Passing the state certification exam is the pre-condition for holding the positions of a judge, prosecutor, advocate or notary. The certification exam determines whether the theoretical knowledge of a candidate and the skills to use this knowledge comply with the given requirements.”19 The draft law envisioned taking positions of a judge, prosecutor, advocate or a notary, based on the state certification exam. The two types of exam could have been conducted: the general and per specialization. The draft law was considered during the plenary session of a parliament. An independent expert – Lali Bakradze has prepared a conclusion #430420, which includes a number of remarks towards the draft law. Despite this, the parliament of Georgia has not enacted the draft law on legal education yet. It could be said that enactment of this draft law is not even on the agenda of priorities. As for the rest of the two regulated professions under the legislation of Georgia: pedagogical profession and medical profession, they are regulated by separate bylaws (law on medical profession, standards of pedagogical profession, etc.). Therefore, the only bylaw that establishes the qualification requirements for the state-regulated higher legal education is the national qualification framework, established under the Ordinance of the Minister of Education and Science #120/n. The national qualification framework is composed of three parts, which include the frameworks for general education, professional education and higher education. The higher education qualification framework is defined as: “the document that is part of the national qualification framework and which systematizes the qualifications of higher (academic) education in Georgia”. According to the document, the higher education qualification is: “the result of an education, which is achieved through undergoing the academic educational program and is confirmed by the diploma issued by the higher educational entity. The higher education qualification framework ensures description of the higher education qualifications based on the education results.” As demonstrated, the present document is the unified bylaw, which defines the general determinant features of a higher education qualification and is applicable for all professions. According to the qualification framework, implementation of the educational programs regulated by the state is possible only after receiving an accreditation. Therefore, a higher legal education may only be provided by the accredited educational facilities. In order to have a right to study at the first level of a higher educational facility, one must have completed full general education. In this regard it should be mentioned that the draft law discussed above included the chapter: “pre-university education”, according to which: “1. The general educational facility is obliged to provide pupils with the general introductory education in law, minimum during the last year of study. The education program must include the basics of the constitution of Georgia, civil law and criminal law. 19

http://www.civilin.org/Project/p110.pdf http://www.civilin.org/Project/d110.pdf

2. the legal educational program offered by the general educational entity must be approved by the state coordination council of the legal education.” The sub-paragraph on the “programs of secondary education” includes also the “draft concept of the legal education”, which was prepared in July 2002, by the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association (GYLA) and the American Bar Association (ABA) with the assistance of the USAID. The concept says that: “the secondary education program must include the mandatory study of the basics of the law and state of Georgia in the last year of study – in the ninth grade, as well as the deepened study of the law in the tenth and eleventh grades of the specialized educational facilities. The teaching of the basics of the state and law of Georgia in the basic school must include the theoretical part of the state and law basics, the general theoretical overview of the constitution of Georgia and other main legislative acts and bylaws, relations among the state and an individual, conventions on the protection of human and child rights. At the final stage of an education the examination must be conducted, which will confirm the general legal theory preparation”. According to the incumbent legislation, teaching the law elements is conducted at all three levels of the general education: at the beginning level, the basic and the secondary levels and it is united under the subject group of public sciences. The independent study of the public sciences at the basic level starts from the V grade. The pupils study the course “Our Georgia” for the two years. Within the course, pupils learn the basic principles of the civil society. At the basic level, along with the history and geography, the civil education subject is taught as well; this subject combines important legal issues and establishes that the pupil, within the course, must: “aknowledge the importance of the democracy, constitution, national and international legislation, as the legal basis of the country; aknowledge the link between his/her own rights and obligations with those of others and must make certain steps in terms of protecting his/her own and others’ rights; must aknowledge the importance of human/child rights and make certain steps towards protecting them; must aknowledge the improtance of protecting the rights of specific groups of persons and make certain steps for their protection.” The course becomes even deeper at the secondary stage and gives pupils a possibility to learn the basics of political, legal and economic sciences; therefore, the civil education may be considered as the precondition for the legal education in the general education facilities. However, it should be mentioned that it does not represent a substitution of law, as of a subject, because it is much more complex and unites a number of disciplines. It should also be mentioned that the process of the civil education has a number of problematic issues, which require an attention and resolving. For example, the 2011 research report “the civil education subject in the schools of Georgia and practical application of the knowledge received by pupils at the civil education lessons” says that: “according to the respondents from various categories, the low level of education is caused by the following factors:  Unqualified teachers: there are no civil education specialists in Georgia and there is no clear understanding of who should teach this subject in the schools. The teachers do not have proper knowledge of legal and social sciences (for example, of psychology).  Improper education environment: the schools do not have material-technical base for effective teaching of the civil education subject.

 The teachers do not have enough means and education materials for quality teaching of the civil education subject.  The existing textbooks do not always comply with the existing requirements and expectations in terms of effectiveness of teaching (mainly the tenth grade textbooks).  In general, the civil culture and awareness is low, which affects the motivation of both the teachers and the pupils. In this context it is interesting to look through the list of preconditions that give prospective university entrants a right to enroll into one or another university, offering higher legal education. In the first place, it is interesting to look through the exam subjects that the prospective entrants have to go through, to enroll to the law faculty. According to the incumbent legislation, the exam subjects are divided into two groups: mandatory and optional subjects. According to the clause 2 of the Article 6 of the Ordinance #19/n of the Minister of Education and Science of Georgia (dated February 18, 2011) on the “Approving the Rules for Distribution of the State Education Grant and the Statute of Conducting the Uniform National Exams”: the mandatory subjects for enrolling to the academic programs are: Georgian language and literature, general skills, one or more foreign languages according to the optional academic program of the higher educational entity. Apart from the mandatory subjects, for enrollment to the academic program, the higher educational facility selects one of the following subjects (in agreement with the Natonal Center of Education): mathematics, humanitarian subjects, literature, geography, history, natural science subjects – chemistry, physics, biology. As seen above, neither optional, nor mandatory subjects include law or civil education subjects; in a majority of cases, the history exam is taken to enroll to the law faculties. It is disputable, whether evaluation of a future lawyer based on the knowledge of history (apart from a mandatory subject) is enough. When speaking of quality, this is one of the components that are being disputed up to date; specifically, to what extent should the future lawyer have a general legal education, whether this is a precondition for the student to easily pick up university education. It should also be underlined that very often, the students enroll to the law faculties not through their first choice; the uniform national exam system gives them possibility to select a number of professions if the exams give such a possibility. If the exam scores are not enough for enrolling to the first selection, the entrants may enroll to the second selection, etc. However, it is less likely that such student will be motivated enough, especially that making a decision at age of 18 is already difficult. It is preferable for the state to change an approach in this regard and to add law or civil education subject to the list of the optional exam subjects. In this case, a prospective entrant will make a much more thoughtful choice and will be more prepared for the responsible step – becoming a lawyer. 3.1.5. Factors, Affecting Legal Education Quality

The legislation, which is the basis for providing the legal education in Georgia, was examined within the analysis. Therefore, the factors that affect the quality of legal education and that directly or indirectly determine formation of qualified legal professionals in a country were identified.

1. State Standard of Legal Education – the concept21 of legal education, elaborated in 2002 has defined that “starting the process of formation of state standards of legal education is an urgent necessity. Existence of the state standards that are operable, rational, up-to-date and coherent with the modern requirements is the precondition for establishing quality control system for the legal education.” It is important to consider that after the 2002, significant changes were introduced to the entire educational ststem; currently, a national framework for qualifications already exists, which prescribes what the outcomes of the first, second and third levels of university education should be and what are the qualification determinants; the overall number of credits is prescribed and there is a uniform rule of university enrollment. Despite this, the law, as the regulated profession, requires specific approach and regulation. It is reasonable to create a discipline-specific document – a unified act (for example, the law on legal education), which would define the uniform state standard of legal education, in which the state will unambiguously define - what does the qualification of a lawyer mean? What should a lawyer know and what skills should he/she have? 2. Operable Role of the Department of Ensuring Quality – according to the law of Georgia on the higher education, the Department of Ensuring Quality ensures the quality of a higher legal education; such a department is a mandatory structural entity – part of a higher legal education. Out of the examined educational entities, the operation of this structural entity is more systematized in the state universities than in private universities. However, the information provided on the websites is often outdated. There are only recommendations, approved by the director of the National Center for Development of the Education Quality. It is preferable to strengthen this structural entity and improve the uniform methodology, elaborate strategic vision and create an action plan. It is preferable to focus on the regulated professions to show the principled approach of the state towards these professions; the quality controls should be constantly supported to ensure creation of a pool of strong legal professionals in a country. 3. Library – the role of the contemporary literature is rather significant in ensuring the quality of legal education. In this regard, the evaluation may be conducted in two main directions; one, to what extent the literature, indicated in the syllabuses is up-to-date and relevant and second, to what extent is the literature indicated in the syllabuses available. The first issue is directly linked with the competence of the lecturer and responsibility of an academic personnel; as for the availability, the question is – to what extent is the library rich in information, whether it is equipped with the contemporary electronic library tools. Undoubtedly, it should be positively evaluated that one of the authorization standards says that: „t) whether the library resources of the entity (both print and electronic) comply with the literature, indicated in the study programs (syllabuses), as well as whether the engagement in the international electronic library network is ensured; i) whether the library catalogue, rules of using the library and the properly equipped reading hall exist in the entities”.

Legal education concept – Georgia Young Lawyers’ Association, July 2002;

Despite the above, the environment in the libraries is far from perfect; it is necessary to continue working in this regard and to transform the libraries to one of the most accessible places, in which they will spend most of their time. 4. Academic Personnel – when speaking of quality, one of the basic and critical factors is the qualification of the academic personnel. This is the criteria which determines the level of attraction of the students to one or another university. The changes, made in the recent period, the accreditation/authorization processes have created a necessity for the universities to invite such profesors, who would ensure the coherence of the programs with the established standards through their competence and status. The authorization standard establishes the proportion of the number of the academic personnel with the status of an entity and number of students, specifically: a) college – minimum one full, associated or assistant-professor per 40 students, but no less than 10 professors; b) educational university – minimum one full or associated professor per 50 students in case of implementing no more than 5 educational programs. In case of implementing from 6 to 12 educational programs – minimum one full or associated professor per 60 students. In case of implementing 12 or more educational programs – minimum one full or associated professor per 70 students, but no less than 15 full, associated or assistant-professors; c) in the universities – in case if implementing no more than 11 educational programs, minimum one full or associated professor per 50 students; in case of implementing from 12 to 24 educational programs – minimum one full or associated professor per 60 students, in case of implementing 24 and more educational programs – minimum one full or associated professor per 70 students, but no less than 25 full, associated or assistant-professors. The clause saying that the educational program may not be conducted by only invited personnel, researchers or teachers, is important. It should be underlined that the tendency evolved within a certain period; the tendency is that the same person works in a number of universities, in varioys regions of Georgia and if evaluated realistically – very often it is impossible for one person to handle such a scale of work. The fact that the number of legal faculties existing in the higher legal education facilities in Georgia significantly exceeds the number of academic personnel in the country may be one of the reasons that cause the problem. In difference with the foreign practices, the large majority of the higher educational facilities in Georgia have a legal faculty, which is caused by large demand on the legal education and also by the fact that this demand and therefore the large number of law students makes the law faculty the “breadwinner” for an educational facility. In terms of academic personnel, the above authorization standard rule represents a sort of control mechanism; according to the rule, for the purposes of authorization one full professor is counted for one university only, for only two educational universities or only two colleges – or, a college and an educational university – per professor’s choice. As for the associated professor, he/she is counted for only two entities per professor’s choice. Holding a position of a full or associated professor in two or more entities is being checked through to the registrar of the educational facilities. Despite this, it is important to provide maximum stimulation of local personnel to avoid the situation in which only few persons

are loaded with a too large amount of academic hours, which as a result, precludes systematially conducting quality and qualifieid lectures.

3.2. Analysis of Syllabuses and Programs Simultaneously with the analysis of the legislation, regulating higher legal education in Georgia, the analysis of the law syllabusses and programs of the higher educational facilities in Georgia is the key part of the quality component of the research. On the one hand, the research team was interested to examine whether the legislation of Georgia ensures quality higher legal education, what is the problem and how it can be resolved; the research team was also interested to examine what is the determinant of the quality of a higher legal education under the domestic legislation. Secondly, it is interesting to examine whether the incumbent legislation is being implemented, despite its shortcomings and advantages. In this regard, the research team has examined the programs and syllabuses of the examined universities. 3.2.1. The Education Course Programs (Syllabuses)

The Ordinance #188 (dated 07.04.2011) of the director of the National Center for Education Quality Development regulates the recommendations for the authorization of higher educational entities. According to the first clause of the Article 11 of the Ordinance, the Syllabus should include: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j)

Name of the study course; Author; Goals of the study course/module; Number of credits and hour distribution for students; Preconditions for enrollment; Study outcomes; Content; Methods of learning; Evaluation criteria; Main and additional literature.

Prior to evaluating the syllabuses it is important to define the nature of the syllabuses and the evaluation criteria. The program of the study course (syllabus) is a document, that provides an information on the goals of the study course/module, expected outcomes, credits, content, methods of learning, evaluation criteria. Apart from the list, provided under the Ordinance, the practice shows various other criteria, such as:

1. The name of the educational course has a very significant importance. The content and the study topics under the curriculum should be in exact coherence with it. It is important for the name to be in coherence with the level of the qualification (according to the uniform structure, approved

46Â Â

by the Bergen conference of the European ministers, responsible for a higher education, held on May 19-20, 2005) that is aimed at under a specific educational course. 2. The Code of the Educational Course (Module) (this code is granted by the education process management department of a relevant university, in accordance with the uniform rules); this graph of the university syllabuses is very often empty, however, internal regulations of universities must grant such codes to the syllabuses. 3. Status of an Educational Course – the status must include: the faculty, education level (higher professional, bachelor, of a medical worker with diploma, doctors), whether it is mandatory or optional. All of that must respond to the question – who are the target group for the educational course. Is it also important to indicate in the graph – whether the course is mandatory or optional for students of various specializations. 4. Number of Credits and Distribution of Hours for Students ECTS – which reflects the credits of an educational course and number of contact and independent study hours per weeks and semesters. The credits must reflect both contact as well as independent working hours which is the time that the lecturer spends with the audience (students) and the time that the students need for preparing the study material. The mentioned graph should also include the timings of interim and final evaluations. 5. Lecturer (Lecturers) – this graph must include the identification information of the lecturer (name, surname, academic status, academic employement at the university), as well as the work place and contact information. The course may be delivered by a number of lecturers; in this case it is necessary to include their full information as indicated above. 6. Goals of an Educational Course – the goal should not be too broad and general; on the contrary, the goal should be specific and should clearly reflect the aims of an educational course. In its turn, all of the levels of an education have a separate objective and their specifics significantly differ from each other. 7. Preconditions for Enrollment to an Educational Course – this graph must indicate the subjects that a student should have passed to have a right to enroll to the given subject. In case of need, if the course requires student to have a specific knowledge, it should be indicated as well. 8. The Format of an Educational Course – the mentioned graph must indicate what type of work meetings will be conducted with the students and what will be their intensity – for an example, a lecture, practical work, etc. 9. Content of an Educational Course – the topic and literature (with indication of specific pages) of a lecture/seminar/practical or laboratory work, etc. It is important that the mentioned graph clearly indicates the length of a lecture topic, its name, materials with the specific pages indicated. Through the syllabus, the student should be able to receive all of the necessary information relating to the study content, which as a rule, is provided in a form of an attachment/appendix.

10. Evaluation – the evaluation criteria must be indicated, along with the preconditions for admission to the final and additional exams. The forms of interim and final evaluations: quiz, written or verbal exam, presentation, etc. – must be indicated. In addition, the proportion of an each form of an exam in the final evaluation (in accordance with the relevant university rules) must be indicated. 11. Mandatory Literature – the main handbooks, outlines, electronic textbooks and documents, web-page, in accordance to which the subject is taught, so-called readers. It is important for this literature to be accessible in a library of the relevant higher educational institution, of which the students should be informed. 12. An Additional Literature – and other educational materials; this graph must indicate those books, scientific articles, electronic resources, web-pages and other educational materials, which the students may use to receive an additional knowledge on the content of the educational course (in addition to the mandatory materials). 13. Study Results – this graph must indicate the discipline-related knowledge and general skills that the student will gain as a result of the educational course; specifically, the knowledge and awareness, skills of applying the knowledge in the practice, ability to draw conclusions, communication skills, study skills and values. 14. Methods of Teaching and Learning – this graph must indicate the methods that will be applied to transfer the knowledge to the students. For example, the Socratic method, verbal method, method of working with a book, laboratory method and demonstration method, practical method, discussion and debate, group work method, problem-based teaching, cooperative teahing, Heuristic method, case study, brain storming, role and situation plays, demonstrating method, induction, deduction, analysis and synthesis, explanation, action oriented teaching, electronic teaching, etc. 15. Additional Preconditions for Studying the Course – existence and filling out this graph is not mandatory, however, if such preconditions exist, it is mandatory to fill this graph.

3.2.2. Indicators for Evaluation of Syllabuses

During an overview, the syllabuses were evaluated through the following indicators: 1. Comprehensiveness of the Information Indicated in the Syllabus • • •

All graphs are filled out The following graph/s are not filled out (...) The following graph/s are not filled out comprehensively (...)

2. Proper Use of the ECTS System • •

The credits adequately reflect the study workload of the students The credits are not coherent with the study workload of students

•

It is impossible to examine the coherence of the credits with the study workload of students because the volume of the mandatory materials is not indicated

3. The Goals of the Course • •

Are clearly formulated Are not clearly formulated

4. Preconditions for Studying the Course • •

The preconditions are in coherence with the goals of a course The preconditions are not in coherence with the goals of a course

5. The Content of an Educational Course • • • • • •

Is in coherence with the goals and expected outcomes of a course Is not in coherence with the goals and expected outcomes of a course The topic of a lecture, seminar, practicum, laboratory work (etc.) is indicated The topic of a lecture, seminar, practicum, laboratory work (etc.) is not indicated The pages of a mandatory literature are indicated The pages of a mandatory literature are not indicated

6. The Coherence of an Evaluation with the Elaborated Rules (minimum of three components, maximum 40% and minimum 30% - the final exam, the mandatory writing component in the final exam, etc.) • • •

Full compliance Full incompliance Partial compliance

7. Evaluation Criteria • •

Is indicated Is not indicate

8. Mandatory Literature • • • •

Is coherent with the course goals Is not coherent with the course goals The contemporary literature is presented The outdated literature is presented

9. Additional Literature and Other Study Materials • • • •

Is coherent with the course goals Is not coherent with the course goals Contemporary literature is presented Outdated literature is presented

10. Expected Outcomes of a Study (knowledge and awareness, ability to apply knowledge in practice, ability to draw conclusions, communication skills, study skills, values) • • •

Are indicated Are not indicated Are partially indicated

11. Coherence Among the Course Goals and the Education Results • • •

Full compliance Full incompliance Partial compliance

12. Coherence Among the Expected Outcomes of a Study and the Evaluation Methods • • •

Full compliance Full incompliance Partial compliance

13. Methods of Teaching and Learning • •

Are indicated Are not indicated

The overview does not reflect the program of each of the examined universities and the results of examining its subjects, due to the confidentiality reasons and due to the agreement with the universities. However, the general problems and shortcomings are indicated, reflecting whether the perfect educaiton criteria are fulfilled comprehensively.

3.2.3 Evaluation

State Universities Frequent Problems  



The study methods list all of the potential methods that broadly exist, while it is impossible to apply all of them in practice during the lecture week. Only conventional education method – the lecture is indicated. The goals are not coherent with the methods. It is impossible to achieve such goals as for example – improvement of the research skills through lectures only. The study results are not thought through and detailed; it is not explained – which subject will result in which outcome; in some cases it is not indicated, in other cases, it is indicated very poorly (knowledge and awareness, skills of applying theoretical knowledge in practice, skills of drawing conclusions, communication skills, values).



It is not indicated whether the indicated subject is mandatory or optional. Although it is not an obligation to indicate this, but it would be recommended to do so, since it will make it easier for a student to prepare for the subject based on the syllabus. The preconditions for enrollment to the course are not indicated.

Individual Problems

  

Literature: In a specific field, there is another textbook, which is used in many universities as a basic literature and it is not even indicated as an additional literature in a specific syllabus. The reason for this shortcoming is lack of renewal of the syllabuses. When the syllabus is created, it is usually not renewed and is used each year automatically. An additional literature or other additional materials are not indicated. Little amount of indicated literature. The content of the educational course has structural shortcomings.

 

Format: The format of the educational course is not filled out The format of the educational course is indicated in other graphs.



 

Other: The lecturer information graph is not fully filled out; neither status of the indicated lecturer nor the contact information are indicated. The enrollment preconditions are not properly defined.

Private Universities Frequent Problems   

 

The content of an educational course is not properly formulated in a number of cases and frequently lacks an indication of pages; The identity, status and information of a lecturer is not indicated; Credits:  The number of credits is less than the study workload of the students;  The hour distribution is not indicated. The course goals are formulated too broadly; Expected outcomes are not indicated in detail (knowledge and awareness, ability to apply knowledge in practice, ability to draw conclusions, communication skills, learning skills, values).

Individual Problems       

The status of an educational course is not indicated; The format of an educational course is not indicated; An additional literature is not indicated; The pages are not indicated in accordance with the topics (in the mandatory literature); The name of the study course is too broad; The goals of the educational course are unified with the expected outcomes of the course, in a number of cases the goals are formulated to broadly; There is a rather large number of methods listed – they might theoretically give possibility of achieving the results, but it is impossible to really apply all of them due to the study format. There are too many methods indicated.

3.3. Educational Program Ordinance #188 of the Director of the Education Quality Development Center (dated 07.04.2011) regulates the recommendations on authorization of higher education facilities. The Article 5 of the mentioned Ordinance defines the content of an educational program, according to which, the educational program must include: a) Name of the program; b) The qualification (status) that will be granted as a result of undergoing the program; c) The volume of the program expressed in credits; d) Study language; e) Goal of an educational program that is aimed at developing the skills of a student and defining the employment sphere; f) Preconditions for enrollment to the program; g) Expected results; h) Methods of achieving the study results; i) System of evaluating student knowledge; j) Study plan, with indications on the peculiarities of study structure. In addition, the program must include: a) The programs (syllabuses) of the study courses; b) Information on the necessary human and material resources for implementing the educational program; c) The program approval act (the program must be elaborated and approved under the rules, prescribed in the statute/regulation). Article 15 of the Ordinance prescribes the system of program evaluation, according to which the entity must elaborate the evaluation system for the educational program. It is preferable to use the forms of surveys that the academic personnel and students should fill out. Based on the evaulation of an educational program, one of the structural entities of an institution should elaborate recommendations and relevant action plans for further improvement of the educational programs. The Bologna Process Prescribes 10 Major Objectives:

1. qualifications that are easy to understand and compare; 2. Three-stage system of an education (bachelors, masters, doctorate) and uniform degrees; 3. Credit system; 4. Mobility; 5. Ensuring quality and accreditation; 6. Attractiveness of an European education; 7. Higher educational facilities and students; 8. Lifelong education; 9. Social dimension in higher education; 10. Integration of an education and research. The content of an educational program must include: 1. legislation of Georgia; 2. Requirement of a national qualification framework; 3. Standards per disciplines (in case of existence); 4. University regulations; 5. Requirements of a labor market/employers; 6. Requirements of professional organizations (in case of existence); 7. National traditions in a relevant field/sub-field; 8. Experience of western universities; 9. Western professional standards (tuning documentation, common counting start points of the Britain’s agency for ensuring quality, etc.). 3.3.1. Education Steps

 Bachelors – a first level educational program of a higher academic education, which foresees learning the basics of a relevant specialization, which is necessary to work in a given profession and to continue study at masters’ level (no less than 240 credits); The name of a prospective qualification to be granted after completion of a bachelors’ educational program must include the term “bachelor” with indication of a relevant field and/or discipline/specialization. The goal of study at a bachelors’ level is (along with a professional preparation of a higher level than full general education) comparatively deeper study of the theoretical aspects of an educational discipline, which prepares a person (through the research-type programs) for further study in masters and for work in consideration of the limitations prescribed by the legislation of Georgia.  Masters – the second level study program of a higher academic education, which includes elements of a scientific research and aims at preparing post-bachelors’ level specialist, as well as prepares a person for working on the received qualification (no less than 120 credits); The name of a prospective qualification to be granted to a person after completion of a masters’ educational program must include the term “master” along with indication of a relevant field, discipline, specialization.

The goals of study at masters are: a) Preparing for scientific-research work and for teaching at a higher educational institution; b) Changing specialization; c) Improving qualification. Masters’ educational program, apart from art and sports specializations may not include only teaching. It must ensure that students independently conduct such a research, based on which he/she will be able to present a qualification work.  Doctorate Studies – a third level study program of a higher education, a combination of educational and scientific-research components, which aims at preparation of scientific personnel, which results in granting an academic degree of a doctor (no less than 180 credits); In case of completion of doctorate studies and presenting a dissertation, the doctorate students is given an academic degree, the name of which must include the term “doctor” with an indication of a relevant field and/or discipline/specialization. A higher educational institution ensures doctorate with a scientific supervisor, creates conditions for conducting scientific research-oriented work, which must include well-grounded theoretical and/or experimental results, support integration of a doctor into a world scientific society. 3.3.2. Qualifications’ Structure for the European Environment of a Higher Education22

On May 19-20, 2005, the conference of Bergen (composed of European ministers responsible for a higher legal education) has approved the uniform qualification structure for the European environment of a higher education. In includes three steps, general evaluation of the education results and competences and number of credits for the first and second levels.

First step qualifications

Expected result

ECTS credits:

The qualifications that are equivalent to the first stage, are granted to the students that:

Usually includes 180-240 credits

 Have knowledge of a discipline that is based on the general education, is ensured with the post-school textbooks and includes the top aspects of a discipline  Are able to apply their knowledge and skills to show their professional approach towards their work or profession and have competences, which are demonstrated through elaboration of arguments and defending them and resolve the problems in their discipline; have an ability to collect and interpret the relevant data (within their discipline) to form opinions that reflect relevant social, scientific and ethical issues; 22

www.bologna-bergen2005.no

Second stage qualifications

Third stage qualifications

 Have an ability to communicate on information, ideas, problems and ways to resolve them in circles of both specialists and non-specialists;  Have such skills of learning, which are necessary for further continuation of education independently. The relevant qualifications of the second stage are granted to students, which:

Usually includes 90-120 credits, minimum of 60  Have knowledge, which is based on and which credits at the deepens the knowledge received at the first stage and second stage frequently (in the context of the research) ensures innovative development of an idea and/or basis of an application or possibility;  Have an ability to apply the knowledge and the skills of problem-solving in a new or unknown environment, in the context of their discipline (or related discipline (multi-discipline) context;  Have an ability to integrate knowledge, have an ability to overcome difficulties and to form opinions based on incomplete or limited information, which is reflected in the social and ethical responsibility, relating to an application of their knowledge and ideas;  Have an ability to present their conclusions publicly, make clear justification of these conclusions with knowledge and logic – both in front of specialists and non-specialists;  Have such skills of learning that give possibility of continuing self-defined or independent education; Not defined The qualifications, equivalent to the third stage are granted to the students that:  Have an ability of systematically perceiving their field/discipline and are skilled in research methods relating to the discipline;  Have a scientific ability of planning, implementing and adapting the research process;  Make their contribution to the development of a discipline through innovative research, which broadens the limits of knowledge and which deserves to be reflected in the national or international referred publications;  Have an ability to critically analyze, evaluate and make a synthesis of complex ideas;  Have an ability to communicate with their colleagues, broad scientific circles and society (within their field);  Have an ability to support knowledge-based

technologic, social and cultural development in a society (in academic and professional context).

3.3.3. Education Program Components

 Program Name – should be coherent with a relevant discipline/specialization or subdisciplina/sub-specialization.  Granted Academic Degree – is regulated by the state (for example, special Ordinance, rule, intstruction, national qualification framework, etc.).  Head of the Program  Goal of the Program: clearly elaborated; it is preferable to list out the program goals and its necessity/actuality in bullet points.  Study Results: the study results should be described in discipline-specific and general (transferal) competences, according to the six criterions: knowledge and awareness, knowledge application in practice, ability to draw conclusions, communication skills, ability to learn and values.  Employement Field: the goal-orientedness of a program, its content and structure; study results must be coherent with the indicated spheres of employment and the legislation of Georgia.  Possibility of Continuing an Education: it is possible to indicate the disciplines, in which the student (student that completes a current program) will be able to continue an education (the general profile of a program should be indicated – not just its name, which might change over time).  The Precondition for the Program Enrollment and a Maximum Number of Students – the various level programs might have different enrollment preconditions (specific classification of a previous level, a specific educational course, etc.). It is also possible to restrict a number of students due to the existing resources.  Program Structure (Education Plan) – mandatory and optional modules, educational courses and their credits must be indicated. It is preferable for the credits of an educational course (module) to be dividable by 5. The number of credits of the optional educational courses, represented in a program (its module) must be less than the credits to be selected by students.  Material-Technical Base of a Program – please indicate a relevant resource center, library, laboratory, etc.  Types of Doctoral Programs – the doctorate programs might be disciplinary, interdisciplinary or thematic. Combinations of Basic (major) and Additional (minor) Specializations National Qualification Framework Requirement: a) Basic specialization and free components; b) Basic specialization, additional specialization and free components; c) Basic and two additional specializations. Advantage of the two basic specializations (double major)  A broader area of employment and further education (increase of an employment rate);  Safeguarding interests of less-oriented specializations on the contemporary labor market;  Restoration of a quantitative balance among the specializations;  The problem of granting a qualification – if a student has complied will all of the requirements of a specialization.

3.3.4. Program Evaluation Indicators

1. Comprehensiveness of the Represented Information   

All parts are filled out; The following part/s is/are not filled out; The following part/s is/are partially filled out.

2. Program Coherence with the National Qualification Framework  

Is coherent Is not coherent

3. Coherence of the Potential Academic Degree with the National Qualification Framework  

Is coherent Is not coherent

4. Potential Academic Degree in English (BA, BSc, BBA, MA, MSc, MBA, PhD ...)  

Is indicated correctly Is not indicated correctly

5. Program Textbook Qualification  

Complies with the program goals Does not comply with the program goals

6. Credibility of Program Qualification Characteristics      

The program goal is well-elaborated; The program goal is not well-defined; The program’s expected outcomes are well-elaborated; The program’s expected outcomes are not clearly elaborated; The prospective employment spheres are indicated correctly; The prospective employment spheres are not indicated correctly.

7. Coherence Among the Program Goal and Education Results   

Fully compliant Fully incompliant Partially compliant

8. Compliance of a Program Structure and Study Results   

Fully compliant Fully incompliant Partially compliant

9. Number of Optional Subjects  

Complies with the university regulations; Does not comply with the university regulations.

10. ECTS Credits    

Are correctly distributed within a program Are not correctly distributed within a program Are correcly indicated in educational courses Are not correctly indicated in educational courses

11. Educational Practice    

Program does not include practical component, because it is not required; Program does not include practice, however, it is required The program includes practice, but not in the due scale The program includes practice in a proper scale

12. Material-Technical Base (Infrastructure)  

Ensures program implementation Is unable to ensure program implementation

13. Library  

Ensures program/research implementation Does not ensure program/research implementation

14. Opportunity to Continue Education   

Is indicated correctly Is not indicated correctly Is not indicated at all

15. Preconditions for Program Enrollment  

The preconditions are coherent with the program goals The preconditions are not coherent with the program goals

16. Conclusion    

The program is given positive recommendation The program is given positive recommendation, however in the future it is preferable to improve the program (specific explanations) The program is given positive recommendation after resolving some of the problems (specific remarks and time given for fixing a shortcoming) Program is not given a recommendation (well-justified response).

3.3.5. Evaluation of Educational Programs

As identified in the process of the overview, large part of educational programs is elaborated in a qualified manner and they are in compliance with the incumbent legislation; therefore, the research has not revealed a frequent problems. Therefore, we would like to list individual problems: State Universities: Individual Problems:       

The results of an educational program are not clearly formulated, therefore there is a problem of their coherence with the goals; The program does not reflect coherence of a material-technical base (infrastructure)l there is only general indication that the material-technical base is coherent with the requirements; There is a general indication that the library is coherent with the requirements; however, there is no description, characteristics, number of books, etc. There are very little of the optional subjects in a program; The credit distribution system is incompatible with the requirements; The program is formulated in a very general manner, without specific facts and arguments; The potential academic degree is not indicated in English.

Private Universities: Individual Problems:    



The potential academic degree is not indicated in English at all; The employment fields are not indicated; There is no distribution of credits among the educational courses; The programs do not indicate the compliance of the material-technical base (infrastructure). There is only general statement that material-technical base is compliant with the requirements; Thre is a general statement that a library complies with the requirements; however, there is no description, characteristics, number of books, etc.

Due to all of the above it may be concluded that there are practical problems usually arise in the educational course programs, non-compliance of which are systematic in case of both private and state universities, while educational programs are prepared in a qualified manner.

4. Qualitative and Quantitative Research Based on the overview of the foreign practices of a higher legal education as well as the legislation, regulating higher legal education in Georgia, the theoretical material was processed and information was collected that were necessary for the qualitative research; based on this, the discussion topics were elaborated for the focus groups.

The major goal of a qualitative research (apart from examining requirements of employers) was to determine measurable variables defining legal education for the quantitative questionnaire.

4.1. Guideline for the Qualitative Research Based on the processed theoretical material the guideline was prepared, which included the following main questions: 1. Does your organization provide legal services or does it simply use the services of a lawyer? 2. In your opinion, what criteria should legal education satisfy, to define it as “quality education”? Which measurable indicators of a quality legal education would you outline (what competences should a legal faculty graduate bachelor/master should have). 3. Plese evaluate the university legal education product – the graduates, eho engage in the competition for an employement at the labor market; what are the advantages and disadvantages in their qualification? What is their strength and what is their largest challenge? 4. Do you think that a university must have close relations with potential employers, what is the current environment in Georgia in this regard (general evaluation). 5. How would you evaluate “legal clinic”? To what extent is it effective in terms of professional development? Does your organization serve a function of a “legal clinic” for any of the higher educational facilities? In your opinion, should a “legal clinic” exist at the university basis, or outside university? 6. Did/does your organization have joint projects with universities/legal faculties? (if yes) give examples, describe whether such a cooperation was/is effective and describe future perspectives. 7. What types of requirements does a labor martket have when it comes to graduate persons? 8. To what extent is the quality of a legal education coherent with the local market requirements? International requirements? 9. How would you evaluate the pool of employment-seekers having a legal education – from the perspective of your organization’s experience? Is it difficult to find a professional lawyer? 10. Can you say whether the employment rate is higher or lower when comparing the university legal faculty graduates and the persons that received an education abroad? Please, give a well-grounded response and name the examples. 11. What stages must a legal graduate undergo to get employed at your organization? Does your organization have intern lawyers?

12. To what extent do the law graduates have a possibility of professional development and career advancement in your organization? What are the concrete examples of this? is there a risk of braindrain of persons with qualified legal education in your type of an organization? 13. There is an approach, according to which it is not necessary for a law faculty student to receive a specific specialization in a university. A student should become a general profile lawyer and later become a specialist of a specific field during the work in the organization, according to the cases that he/she frequently has to deal with. Do you agree with this opinion and does your organization give laweyer a possibility of specialization? 14. If it was decided by you, what kind of changes would you introduce to the legal education system in Georgia (in terms of receiving quality legal education)? (for example – intensive use of interactive practical exercises during the lectures, writing analysis of court decisions, practice of resolving the problems, etc.) 15. As of today – how are laweyrs “accepted into the profession” and how it should be? (example of Belgium, lawyer’s profession: person who have masters’ diploma must undergo three-year internship with a lawyer, who is a member of the lawyers’ list for more than five (5) years. During an internship: 1. An intern must visit the lawyers’ bureau and visit the processes of his/her supervisor; 2. Participate in providing legal support to the socially vulnerable; 3. Attend the seminares and conferences, as well as court hearing exercises, orgnized by the bureau of lawyer certification; 4. Conduct minimum of 15 court procedures (from addressing the court to completing it) or take comprehensive participation in preparing 30 court cases for a hearing; 5. After the completion of a three-year internship, an intern must pass the exam, organized by the bureau of lawyer certification. It is notable that this guideline gave the direction to the discussions; however, since the group discussion is a dynamic process, additional questions oriented towards the research goals were asked.

4.2. Ensuring Quality Legal Education in Higher Educational Facilities in Georgia Main Results of Quantitative Research 4.2.1. General Tendencies

Vast majority (more than 70%) of both target group respondents (bachelors, masters, doctorate students, proffessor-lecturers) think that receiving quality legal education in Georgia is an acute problem (see diagram #1):

Diagram #1

Note: the average indicators are counted on a 4-point scale, where 1 means “is not a problem at all”, while point 4 means “is a very serious problem”. The data above 2.5. creates the problem acuteness field.

The analysis of the quantitative research results reflects the unusual picture, because the majority of the interviewees, while discussing the quality of a higher legal education, evaluate it as an “acute” problem. At the same time, the evaluation of the separate components of a higher legal education is more positive than negative. However, we should pay attention to the group of the interviewees that are dissatisfied; such group is small but their opinion requires consideration. For example, if out of ten students, four are dissatisfied and six are satisfied, it can be said that the majority is satisfied; however, the opinion of the four dissatisfied students might be more important if those are motivated and good students that view the situation more critically. The average data reflects only a general tendency, in which the opinion of the majority is given more consideration. However, it is important to underline not only the general tendencies but also the negative attitudes and critical opinions. At the same time, such results much reflect the indifferent attitude of the students towards the educational process and the lack of the critically thinking individuals, which in its essence, is a significant problem in the legal educational system of Georgia. At the same time, the respondents (in call groups) positively evaluate the qualification of specialists of almost all categories (judges, advocates, prosecutors/investigators, notaries, legal consultants).

One of the exceptions are the investigators/prosecutors, whose qualification is negatively evaluated by the professors/lecturers. The notaries and judges have received the best evaluations, whole legal consultants and advocates have received comparatively less positive evaluations (see diagram #2):

Diagram #2

შენიშვნა: the average indicators are counted on a 5-point scale, in which 1 means “very negative evaluation” and 5 means “very good evaluation”. The neutral point of a scale is 3. The data, that is less than 3 reflects low evaluation while the data above 3 indicates positive evaluation.

In the context of state and private universities – the data examination shows that negative evaluation of prosecutors’ qualification characterises professors/lecturers of private universities (MEAN = 2.6), in difference with the state university lecturers (MEAN = 3.0). In general, the regional higher universities (both state and private) are negatively evaluated. All of the rest educational institutions gained positive evaluation of all the three categories of respondents – especially, a Higher School of Justice. However, positive approaches are maintained in regard of other educational institutions in the following order: Educational Center of Justice of Georgia, GYLA Legal Education and Information Center, State and Private Higher Universities. At the same time it is notable that a significant number of respondents (15-35%) in various groups found it

difficult to evaluate various educational institutions (in terms of ensuring legal education), except for the higher educational institutions (universities). Examination of the data in the context of the state and private universities shows that the private higher educational institutions in Tbilisi are evaluated more positively by all of the respondent groups, in comparison with the university representatives.

4.2.2. University Education Quality

Educational Programs The programs existing at the legal faculties (at all three levels – bachelors, masters and doctorate) are positively evaluated in all three groups, both in overall terms and in terms of separate components. The average indicator (Mean) of all all components’ evaluation is higher than a neutral point (Mean=3) on the 5-point scale and very often, evaluations exceed 4 points. The two components were especially positively evaluated in all target groups and in relation to all levels of educational programs: qualification of professors and a number of mandatory subjects in the educational programs. The components, such as technical facilities (projector, computer, printer, etc.) and existence of modern educational materials were relatively critically evaluated by the respondents – in relation to all of the educational programs. The masters’ and doctorates’ groups also criticized the research components as well, while doctorates’ and professors/lecturers have also indicated lack of materials in Georgian language (see diagrams #3-6).

Diagram #3

Diagram #4

Diagram #5

Diagram #6

Note: the average data is counted on a 5-point scale, in which 1 means “very negative evaluation”, while 5 means “very positive evaluation”. The neutral point of a scale is 3. The data that is less than 3 reflects low level evaluation, while data that is more than 3 reflects positive evaluation.

Overview of the data in the context of the state and private universities shows that all levels of educational programs (and all of their components) are much more positively evaluated by private higher educational institution representatives in comparison with the state higher educational institution respondents (average indicator, is usually in-between 4 and 5 points in case of private university representatives). Even such components as the technical facilities (projector, computer, printer, etc.) that in comparison are negatively evaluated in the general selection of the target groups, the private university representatives evaluate it clearly positively. The majority of the interviewed proffessors-lecturers (more than 70%) confirm the existence of legal practice/clinic in the bachelors and masters programs; on the other hand, 60% of doctorate students confirm the existence of legal practice/clinic in the doctorate programs. As it turned out, the most widespread places for the bachelors and masters for undergoing legal practice/clinic are in the universities – specifically, the legal clinics existing in the universities, courts, lawyer organizations and the organizations that have a legal department. The most widespread form of legal practice for the

doctorate students is working as a lecturer/assistant of a lecturer. In the practice places, among the target groups, this is mainly evaluated positively. Importance of the education results (and their realization), determined by the discipline indicators in an educational program The masters’ and bachelors’ study results are perceived as very important in all the target groups. The study results are determined by the discipline indicator of a law educational program, approved/developed by the National Center of Education Quality Development. The average indicators (Mean), in relation to almost all results are very close to the maximum point (on a 5points scale) and vary within 4.5 to 4.8 points. As for the realization of the education results within the existing bachelors and masters programs, here the coefficient of a positive indicator decreases (however, remains within the positive evaluation scale). Comparatively critical evaluation of the respondents related to the realization of the following results of the bachelors programs: a) “has skills of searching information in native and foreign languages and has skills of delivering information through legal terminology in verbal and in writing”; b) “can draft legal documentation (projects of normative acts, agreements, complaints, lawsuits”; c) “has multi-dimensional vision of a legal problem and an ability to develop a thesis for its resolving based on the analysis and an ability to justify the selected approach”. More or less critical evaluations in the masters’ program relate to the realization of the following results: a) “has ability to deliver his/her own legal conclusions and arguments both in writing and verbally – in native and in foreign languages”; and b) “for ensuring that the interests of the parties are fairly balanced – analyzes the existing legal values and, in case of necessity, contributes towards forming new values.” Students, in comparison with the proffessor-lecturers, evaluate the ensuring of the realization of the study results (of the bachelors and masters) more critically. The research results (average indicator/Mean)23 are given in detail in the tables ##1,2: Table #1 Study results of the bachelors educational program

How important is... (Mean)

Whether ensures... (Mean)

The evaluation was based on a 5-point scale, in which 1 means “very negative evaluation” and 5 means “very positive evaluation”. The neutral point of a scale is 3. Indicators that are less than 3 reflect low evaluation while the indicators above 3 reflect positive evaluation.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

4.0

3.9

4.0

4.5

4.7 4.7 4.6 4.9 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.7

4.7 4.8 4.6 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.6 4.6

4.7 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.7

4.8 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8

4.1 4.1 4.0 4.4 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.1

4.0 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.8 4.1 3.9 3.8

4.1 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.2

4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.5

4.8 4.7 4.3

4.7 4.7 4.4

4.8 4.6 4.4

4.8 4.7 4.5

4.3 4.1 4.0

4.0 3.9 3.9

4.3 4.1 4.2

4.6 4.4 4.3

4.7

4.8

4.7

3.9

4.3

4.8

4.6

4.7

3.8

3.7

3.8

4.3

4.7

3.8

3.7

3.9

4.2

4.6

4.7

4.6

3.6

3.7

3.9

4.1

4.7

4.8

4.6

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.7

4.6

4.7

3.9

3.7

3.8

4.3

Bachelors

Professor-l ecturers

4.8

Doctorates

4.7

Magistrates

4.7

Professorslecturers

4.7

Doctorates

Magistrates

Has broad knowledge of the main peculiarities, principles and institutions of the domestic legislation system and deep knowledge of public, private criminal or international law Aknowledges the essence of law and the importance of the fundamental principles of law in forming the legislative system Knows interpretation (law) methods Knows state structure and local self-government issues Knowes main human rights and freedoms Knows the basic principles of the international public law Knows agreement and law-based obligatory relations Knows property law A graduate knows the essence of the administrative law and its principles Knows the essence of the offence, types, and the peculiarities of the criminal law responsibility Knows civil, administrative and criminal litigation Knows historic sources of the Georgian law Has skills of identifying legal problems of finding, interpreting and applying normative grounds for resolving these problems Has ability of drafting legal documentation (projects of normative acts, agreements, complaints, lawsuits, etc.) Has multi-dimensional vision of a legal problem and an ability to develop the ways for resolving it based on the analysis and justification of the selected approach Has an ability to search for information in native and foreign languages, ability of delivering an information in writing and verbally, through use of legal terminology Has an ability of being updated on the legislative amendments, changes in legislative practice, novelties in science and an ability of constantly renewing ones knowledge Knows the ethics of the lawyers’ operation. Is determined to support implementation of the rights of an individual and to act in consideration of the fairness, human rights, social and democratic values.

Bachelors 1

Table #2

ოფესორმასწავლებლები

დოქტორანტები

მაგისტრანტები

პროფესორმასწავლებლები

Has a deep and systematic knowledge of the education field, which gives him/her a possibility of forming an innovative vision towards solving a complex problem. Has aknowledged the ways of resolving the issues from the relevant field. Has skills of complex evaluaion of a legal problem and ability of elaborating innovative ways to resolve problems Has skills of making an analysis and elaborating conclusions in the context of the new legislative environment, legal practice or scientific approaches Has an ability to deliver their own legal conclusions and arguments in native and foreign languages in front of academic and professional circles Has an ability to independently define the synthesis of the theoretical components and practical experience, broaden knowledge based on the newest methods of a relevant field, through generalized analysis of primary sources, scientific articles and court decisions

Whether ensures... (Mean)

დოქტორანტები

How important is... (Mean)

მაგისტრანტები

Study results of the masters’ educational program

4.7

4.8

4.0

4.5

4.7

4.8

3.9

4.0

4.4

4.7

4.8

4.0

4.5

4.7

4.6

4.7

3.7

4.0

4.2

4.7

4.8

3.9

4.1

4.4

პროფესორმასწავლებლები

მაგისტრანტები

დოქტორანტები

ოფესორმასწავლებლები

For ensuring that the interests of parties are fairly balanced, analyzes the existing legislative values and if needed, contributes towards forming new values

დოქტორანტები

Whether ensures... (Mean)

მაგისტრანტები

How important is... (Mean)

Study results of the masters’ educational program

4.6

4.5

4.7

3.8

3.9

4.3

Various Components of Educational Programs The research has shown that the legal faculty programs have a problem in terms of teaching a foreign language, which does not give students a possibility to read foreign educational materials, to make applications for participating in foreign programs etc. It is also negatively evaluated that the foreign professors do not participate in implementing educational programs. Out of interviewed masters’ students, each third disagrees with a statement that masters’ program offers students qualitatively new (different) courses, in comparison with the bachelors’ program. One fourth of interviewed bachelors’ students thinks that the education program does not give a possibility for a student to gain narrow specialization and that the preparation of bachelors’ works are not paid much attention. One fourth of the bachelors’ students think that an educational program does not give an opportunity to a student to gain a concrete specialization and that the preparation of bachelors’ works are not paid serious attention at the faculty. The univocal position of the respondents is that the corruption and protection in the implementation of the educational programs is eradicated. Professors-lecturers were least critical about various aspects of the educational programs. For the detailed results, see the table #3: Table #3 Statements 1 2

3 4

The masters program offers students qualitatively new (innovative) courses, in comparison with the bachelors program An educational program gives an opportunity for a student to gain concrete specialization (based on the specific modules/concentrations or optional subjects) The doctorate studies offer good conditions for planning and pass the dissertation evaluation Teaching a foreign language is at the level which gives students an opportunity to read foreign materials, make an application for participating in the foreign programs, etc. Practicing lawyers are actively engaged in the implementation of an educational program; they analyze the practical cases during the lectures

Bachelors

Masters

Doctorates

(Mean)

3.4 .

Professorslecturers

(Mean)

3.3

3.8

4.1

3.8

3.7

4.2

3.8

4.1

. 2.2

2.5

3.0

3.4

3.7

3.8

4.2

4.4

Statements 6 7 8 9 10 11

The preparation of bachelors’ works are serious attention at the faculty The preparation of masters’ works are serious attention at the faculty Foreign professors participate in implementation of an educational program The students are objectively graded at educational courses The “protection” is eradicated from implemnentation of an educational program The corruption is eradicated from implementation of an educational program

paid paid

Bachelors

Masters

Doctorates

(Mean)

3.1 .

Professorslecturers

(Mean)

3.7

3.8

3.9

4.1

4.0

4.4

the

2.4

2.9

3.2

the

3.8

4.0

4.2

4.5

the

4.0

4.1

4.4

4.6

the

4.4

4.5

4.7

The overview of the data in the context of the state and private universities reflects that the representatives of the state universities are far more critical towards various aspects of educational programs in comparison with the private universities. The respondents from the private universities have demonstrated positive attitude even in relation to those aspects, which have comparatively low results in a general selection (specifically, this relates to the level of the teaching foreign languages, participation of the foreign professors in the educational program, preparation of the bachelors’ works, etc.). The most widespread form of evaluating students in the legal faculty study programs is being active during the seminars. Tests, as well as interim and final exams are applied frequently as well. For the purposes of the interim or final exam, the least applied method is a verbal presentation. Comparatively rare is the application of an essay/report/abstract (as means of an interim or final exam). An overview of the data in the context of the state and private universities reflects that private universities apply such evaluation forms as quizzes, essays/reports/abstracts more often. Large part of law faculties in various universities conduct surveys at the end of each semester, for the purpose of evaluating the program courses and receiving the feedback (this, for example, is confirmed by the 55% of the interviewed professors-lecturers). 4.2.3. Evaluating the knowledge received at the bachelors’ and masters’ level and requirements towards “entering” the profession

Significant (in some cases – large) majority of all four target groups considers that the bachelors’ education received at the universities is enough for passing the lawyers’ qualification as well as masters’ exams. In addition, the masters, doctorates and professors-lecturers consider the bachelors’ education to be enough for passing the notary exams and working as a qualified lawyer in one ot another institution. In this regard, the most “careful” (self-criticizing) are bachelors’ students: their positions were different in terms of whether the education received at the bachelors’ level is enough for passing the notary exams and working as a qualified lawyer in an institution. For example, 45.5% of the interviewed bachelors consider that their education is enough for being employed as a

qualified lawyer in a organization, while almost the same number of respondents says that that their education (bachelors’) is not enough (see the diagram #7). Diagram #7

Evaluation of knowledge received at the masters level is more optimistic: majority of masters, doctorates and professors-lecturers (within 62-82%) consider that the knowledge received at the masters level is enough: for passing the exams to enroll in the Higher School of Justice, exams of a prosecutor, barrister and notary, as well as a qualified lawyers in a institution. The majority of all four target groups considers that only masters’ graduates must be given a right to apply to the following exams:  Judge qualification exams;  Barrister qualification exams. In relation to the prosecutor’s qualification exam, the opinions of the bachelors students differ from the vision of other target groups. The majority of masters’, doctorates and proffessors-lecturers consider that a right to take the prosecutor’s qualification exams should only be granted to the masters graduates. At the same time, the opinions of the bachelors’ students were split: part of them (47.6%) considers that both masters and bachelors graduates must have a right to take the prosecutors exams, while another part (48.4%) considers that this should be a prerogative of only masters’ graduates.

In relation to granting a right to take the notary qualification exams, the attitude of doctorates differs from the vision of the rest of the target groups. Half of the doctorates consider that a right to take the notary exams must be given to only masters graduates. The majority of other target groups considers that this right should also be given to the bachelors as well (see diagram #8): Diagram #8

74Â Â

4.2.4. Attitude towards Qualification Exams

In this case, the level of agreeing to various statements relating to the qualification exams was measured on a 5-point scale (where 1 point is “I don’t agree at all”, and point 5 is: “I completely agree”). Judge qualification exams – in relation to the judge qualification exams the issue of creating exams in a qualified manner and safeguarding the process from the protectionism are highly evaluated by the all for target groups (Mean ≥ 4). Majority of the respondents disagrees that the test

confidentiality is violated and that the testing process management includes serious shortcomings. The target groups had a most ambivalent attitude towards whether the qualification tests are able to adequately evaluate the qualification of an applicant (among the professors-lecturers and bachelors the average indicator for this statement is close to 3 points). Prosecutor qualification exams – the attitude towards the prosecutor qualification system is similar; however, it is a little more critical (in comparison with the judge qualification exam) among the professors-lecturers and doctorates, when it comes to the qualification of tests. All four target groups give high evaluations to the safeguarding the tests from the protectionism (Mean ≥ 4-ზე); in

addition, in this case too, the attitudes towards issue, whether those tests give possibility to adequately evaluate the qualification of an applicant, remain ambivalent (in the groups of professors-lecturers and bachelor students). Barrister qualification exams – the attitudes towards the barrister qualification exams are even more critical: the qualification level of the tests are evaluated positively only by the bachelors students (Mean ≥ 4); the critical evaluations in the target groups increase in relation to whether

these tests adequately measure applicants’ qualification, whether the test management process is free of shortcomings, etc. However, the issue of safeguarding the tests from protectionism is again evaluated highly (Mean ≥ 4) .

Notary qualification exams – the approach towards the notary qualification exams repeats the main tendencies: all groups recognize that this process is free from the protectionism, the evaluation of whether the tests are able to adequately evaluate qualification of an applicant (etc.) is ambivalent.

4.2.5. “Remaining” in the Profession and Desirable Career

Vast majority of the interviewed bachelors and masters (87%) and significant majority of the doctorates (71.2%) say that they wish to follow legal profession (to “remain” in the profession). Bachelors have the highest proportion (5%) of not wishing to “remain in the legal profession”. However, it is notable, that the proportion of those who find it difficult to respond (to the question whether they want to remain in the profession) is highest among the doctorates (25%). This percentage is 1.4% among the bachelors and 3.4% among the masters (such a hesitation of the doctorates may be explained with the fact that for them, the scientific and academic are relevant too) (see diagram #9):

Diagram #9

The most desirable profession among the bachelors students for “remaining” in the legal profession is being a barrister and prosecutor/investigator; among the masters – it is being a barrister, while among the doctorates it is research (being a scientist-analyst). However, there is a highest proportion of persons, who wish to become judges is among the doctorates (22.2%) (see diagram #10). Diagram #10

4.2.6. Student Mobility

The research shows that a preference for an internal mobility is almost zero. Only 0.9% of bachelors students want to move to another faculty of the same university in which they currently study. There are none among masters and doctorates who would want to move to another faculty of the same higher educational institution. External mobility rate of the students is pretty low too: large majority of bachelor students (87%) do not wish to move to another university’s legal faculty. The tendency of preferring to stay in the same higher educational institution is maintained in case of the majority of masters and doctorates. 9% of bachelor students and 6% of master’s students would like to move to the legal faculty of another higher educational institution. There are none among the doctorates who wish to move to another university’s law faculty. The number of persons who wish to move to another university’s non-legal faculty is even smaller and does not exceed one percent among the bachelors and masters students, while there are no such persons among the doctorates (see diagram #11).

Diagram #11

Students aspiring for an external mobility (but within the law specialization), mainly want to move to the legal faculty of the Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Those individual students that say that they want to move to other faculties of their own higher educational institutions mainly choose the faculty of social sciences. The survey shows that the aspirations for mobility (internal or external) of part of the masters and bachelors students are driven by the low quality of teaching in their own university/faculty. According to the 62% of the bachelors students and 44% of the masters students that aspire for an external mobility within the legal profession, say that their wish to move to another university is significantly caused by better quality of teaching the law in the universities, to which they want to move. Therefore, majority of the bachelors students of this category (54%) and almost all of the masters say that their wish to move to another university/faculty is not caused by incorrect choice of the profession and getting interested in another profession. In addition, for the significant majority of bachelors and masters students, aspiring for a mobility, the difficulty of and not being able to keep up with the educational program, not being able to pay the fees or moving to another city â&#x20AC;&#x201C; do not represent the causes for wishing to move (see diagram #12):

79Â Â

Diagram #12

Significant majority of bachelors, masters and doctorate students wish to continue an education in the abroad higher educational institutions at the law faculty. Among the bachelor students, in comparison with the rest of the two groups, the proportion of those who wish to study abroad is the highest, while the lowest proportion of such persons was observed among the doctorates (see diagram #13):

80Â Â

Diagram #13

The main reasons why the students want to continue an education abroad are the following: 1. Expectation to receive a more qualified legal education abroad; 2. Better chances of getting employed with the foreign university diploma in Georgia; 3. Gaining an international experience in law practice. As for the attempts to continue an education abroad, this tendency is stronger in case of masters students (32% have tried) and in case of doctorate students (27%), rather than in case of bachelor students (13%). The differences in attempting to study abroad among the students of various levels have reflected in practice as well: 15% of bachelor students, 19% of masters’ students and 13% of doctorate students have studied abroad for one semester. 2% of bachelors students, 19% of masters’ students and 7% of doctorate students have spent one year in a university abroad. The evaluation of the students that studied in higher educational institutions abroad, is univocally positive in terms of both the educational program (curriculum) in entirety and separate components

of a program (level of professors’ preparation, contemporary study materials, discipline of lecturers and students, coherence of courses with the syllabus, material-technical base, etc.).

4.2.7. Employment Opportunities

The target groups have evaluated both the employment chances of lawyers with various degrees (bachelors, masters, doctorates and doctors) as well as the employment chances for persons that have passed exams for various professions (judges, barristers, prosecutors and notaries) for the various positions and organizations. The evaluation system, in this case too, was based on a 5-point scale, in which points 1 and 2 indicated low chance of an employment, 3 points – an average, while 4 and 5 – high chances. All of the interviewed target groups consider that the employment possibilities for a lawyer with a bachelor degree the employment possibilities are limited (the average indicator does not reach 4 or 5 in any of the interviewed groups – on a 5-point scale). As for the places of employment, it is perceived that the bachelors have the least chances to be employed in the international nongovernmental organizations, as well as in the state/public executive and legislative organizations. In the opinion of the respondents, the bachelors have comparatively better possibilities to be employed at the local non-governmental organizations, which offer citizens legal services, as well as in private organizations. Higher the educational level and the attained degree, the more target groups perceive positively the employment prospects for the relevant graduate: masters are perceived to have better chances in comparison with the bachelors, while doctorates are perceived to have better chances in comparison with masters and bachelors, while doctors – in comparison with bachelors, masters and doctorates. This relates to the employment prospects in practically all of the organizations. As for the employment possibilities of those lawyers who passed the judge, prosecutor, barrister or notary qualification exams, in this case, the survey data on the employment chances are mainly high. It is interesting to observe that the respondents perceive that the specialists that have passed the relevant qualification exams have higher chances to work as judges, prosecutors, barristers or notaries. The target group of professors-lecturers is an exception, the employment chances of which (of those who passed qualification exams) at the court and prosecution are less than 4 points; in addition, the professors-lecturers consider that the chances for employment of the persons that have passed the judge and prosecution qualification exams are less than of those who have passed the barrister and notary exams. As for other places of employment (local and international NGOs, state executive and legislatie organizations, private entities, etc.), the research shows that the chances for the persons that have passed the legal qualification exams (in all four target groups) are evaluated as mainly high (the average indicator is 4 and more). An exception is the evaluation of the chances for the persons that passed the notary exams: the evaluation of chances by practically all of the target groups is less

positive (average data is less than 4) in relation to the fields of employment such as international organizations, state/public legislative and executive institutions. The survey results are given in detail in the tables ##4,5:

83Â Â

Table #4 Average indicators (MEAN)

Bachelors students

Masters

Professorslecturers

Doctorates

Doctor

Doctorate

Master

Bachelor

Doctor

Doctorate

Master

Bachelor

Doctor

Doctorate

Master

Bachelor

Doctor

Doctorate

Master

Bachelor

Employment places

Local NGOs that offer citizens legal services/consultation

Local NGOs that require lawyer services International nongovernmental organizations State/public governance (executive) bodies State/public legislative bodies Local government and selfgovernment bodies Private organizations

3.4

4.1

4.6

4.8

3.2

3.3

4.1

4.3

4.6

3.1

2.8

3.7

4.4

4.6

2.7

2.8

3.8

4.2

4.5

2.9

2.5

3.4

4.4

4.6

2.5

3.1

4.1

4.5

4.7

2.8

3.4

3.9

4.5

4.6

3.1

4.6

4.7

3.8

3.0

Legal persons of public law

4. 1 4. 1 3. 6 3. 8 3. 5 4. 0 3. 9 4. 4

4.4

4.2 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.6

4. 6 4. 4 4. 4 4. 3 4. 4 4. 4 4. 5 3. 8

3.2

3.2 2.8 3.1 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.2

3. 8 3. 8 3. 7 3. 9 3. 6 3. 9 3. 9 4. 3

4.3

4.5

3.6

4.1

4.3

4.5

3.6

4.1

4.3

4.5

3.0

3.7

4.2

4.4

3.4

3.9

4.3

4.5

3.1

3.6

4.3

4.5

3.5

4.1

4.3

4.5

3.6

3.9

4.6

3.8

3.4

4.3

4. 4

4. 5

4. 1 4. 2 4. 1 4. 2 4. 4 4. 3 4. 5

4. 3 4. 4 4. 3 4. 3 4. 5 4. 4 3. 9

84Â Â

Table #5

Court

4.1

State/public governance (executive) bodies State/public legislative bodies Local government and self-government bodies Private organizations Legal entities of public law

4.2

Has passed notary exam

Has passed barristers exam

3.8 4.2

4.2 4.2

Has passed prosecutors exam

Professors-lecturers Has passed judge exams

Has passed notary exam

Has passed barristers exam

Has passed prosecutors exam

Has passed judge exams

Has passed notary exam

Has passed barristers exam

Has passed prosecutors exam

4.2 4.2

Notary bureaus

International NGOs

Has passed judge exams 4.1

Barrister in state sector (state-financed barrister)

Local NGOs that require legal services

Average (MEAN) Masters students Doctorate students

4.2

Prosecution

Local NGOs that offer legal services/consultations to the citizens

Has passed notary exam

Has passed barristers exam

Has passed prosecutors exam

Employment places

Has passed judge exams

Bachelor students

3.8 4.3

4.3

4.1 4.2

4.0

4.3

4.2

4.0

4.2

4.1

4.3

4.1

3.9

4.2

4.0

4.1

3.9

4.4

4.2

4.3

3.9

4.3

4.2

4.3

4.1

4.3

4.2

4.1

3.8

4.2

3.9

4.1

3.9

4.1

3.9

3.6

4.1

4.0

3.8

4.0

3.8

3.9

3.5

3.9

3.6

3.7

3.6

4.3

4.1

3.8

4.2

4.1

3.9

4.2

4.0

3.8

4.0

3.9

3.8

3.7

4.1

3.9

3.6

4.2

4.0

3.9

3.8

4.3

4.1

3.9

3.7

4.0

3.8

3.6

4.3 4.2

4.1 4.1

4.1 4.2

3.9 4.0

4.3 4.3

4.1 4.1

4.1 4.2

3.9 4.1

4.2 4.3

4.0 4.1

3.8 3.8

4.1 4.2

3.9 4.0

3.9 4.1

3.8 4.0

4.3

4.2

4.0

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.2

4.1

3.8

4.2

4.0

3.9

Note: average indicators are counted on a 5-point scale, where 1 means “very low chances” and 5 means “very good chances”. The neutral point of the scale is 3. Indicators that are less than 3 reflect low chances and indicators that are higher than 3 reflect good chances.

4.2.8. Continuing an Education at a Higher Level

As the data has reflected, an absolute majority of the bachelors’ students (90.1%) want to continue an education in their specialization. The number of those who wish to change their specialization is very small (2.6%). Almost half of the latter says that the reason is that they got interested in another profession. Out of those bachelor students that plan to continue an education in masters, one fourth wish to move abroad. 43.2% says that they want to continue an education in their own university, while 9.3% prefer to study in other universities of Georgia (Tbilisi State University – TSU is named to be a priority). The latter think that the reason for that is on the one hand, that they will receive a better quality education at a legal faculty of another university, while on the other hand, that the legal practice is better organized at the legal faculties of other universities (see diagram #14): Diagram #14

Such data is similar in case of masters students as well. Majority of them do not to change neither faculty nor a university. The number of those who speak of a wish to change is very little.

4.3. Coherence of a Qualified Lawyer with the Employer Requirements at the Labor Market Main Results of Qualitative Research One of the main preconditions for receiving a quality legal education is planning an educational process (the education program in universities, practical works, internship, etc.) in such a way to ensure that the qualification of a law faculty graduate complies with the labor market/employer requirements. The qualitative research has shown some of the components (“systematic indicators), which represent a guarantee for receiving a quality legal education: Educational Program – part of the research participants (mainly the civil sector representatives/employers) supported the idea that a lawyer must have a general qualification, while another group of the participants supported the idea that a lawyer must have narrow specialization, which must start from the third year of study. All of the research participants mentioned the need of deepening practical experience, along with the theoretical knowledge. (ability to correctly apply the received knowledge in practice). Receiving a quality legal education is also ensured by: conducting interactive lectures, solving the problems/cases, translating the legal literature to Georgian (the judges have indicated that inexistence of the legal literature translated into Georgian creates a significant barrier for receiving the quality legal education and further employment). Qualified Personnel – the educational program will not be successfully implemented without the relevant human resources (at the group discussions the participants have indicated that the main part of the professors/lecturers are theorists and there are cases when they are unaware of the amendments enacted to the legislation). Incresing the number of practicing professors/lecturers (it is difficult to engage practitioners in the university work due to their loaded work hours), that will be simultaneously engaged in practice and thus create quality and proper syllabuses will ensure increase of the legal education quality. In the opinion of the research participants, the incresed number of students in groups negatively affects the legal education quality (the universities must establish a certain number of places for potential entrants – in accordance with the labor market requirements; however, due to the commercial reasons, this is done otherwise). Apart from this, some of the participants negatively evaluated the existing model of a legal education, which is an analogue of a western model and is implemented without any adjustment. The research participants have indicated those characteristics that a qualified lawyer/graduate must have to be demanded at the labor market:     

Deep knowledge of law (theory); Knowledge of foreign language and computer programs; Skills of management and communication with clients/citizens; Argument-based verbal and written thinking; Knowledge of the legislation of a country, the company/organization of which he/she will have relations with (if relevant);

  

Knowledge of public servant’s professional ethics; Ability to interpret the law; Responsibility.

Employers very often have a problem finding a qualified employee, because the persons having a legal education very often do not satisfy the labor market/employer demands. For this reason, the lawyer having high level qualification has to cooperate with a number of private or public institutions. Therefore, the employers try to find graduates that have a good theoretical knowledge and afterwards conduct their re-training per needs (business representatives have especially underlined the effectiveness of this method). In the opinion of the research participants, the persons having a legal education more or less satisfy the minimum competences in terms of theoretical knowledge, which is not true in case of practical experience and skills. The quality of the delivered education by the universities and its coherence with the contemporary standards is another issue (the reason why lawyers indicated the need of accreditation and monitoring the accreditation). GYLA representatives in Tbilisi and Kutaisi reported low level of competitiveness of the law faculty graduates, especially in the regions of Georga – where the knowledge received in the universities is so insignificant that the graduates find it difficult to write a simplest legal document. The education received abroad will be a factor, supporting an employment in case if an applicant has received the basis education in Georgia (without knowledge of the Georgian legislation it will be difficult to adapt to the legislative environment in Georgia). The employment rate of graduates, according to the judges is comparatively high for Tbilisi State University (TSU) and a few private higher educational institutions (for example – Georgian-American University – GAU) – large majority of masters’ students are employed and approximately 15% of bachelors’ students are employed. Therefore, the attention of employers is mainly focused on the graduates of these universities. According to the evaluation of the employers, for the majority of the law faculty graduates the most attractive spheres of activities are those, where they are given an opportunity of internship and/or high salary (in this regard, the largest priority is given to the prosecution). According to the research participants, the nepotism is one of the additional barriers for finding qualified human resources at the labor market. For the quality of legal education to respond to the demands of a labor market, it is necessary to deepen the communication among the universities and employers in a form of cooperation. The tendency of such a cooperation is currently demonstrated by state only as of yet (public services) – starting from 2012, through signing memorandums (for example, among the prosecution and a university). The private sector has barriers in terms of cooperating with the universities, such as – lack of technical and human resources, fear of exposing professional secrets to the interns, etc. For establishing oneself at a labor market, specific criteria, necessary for entering legal profession is given priority, for example: the testing does not ensure verification of professionalism and additional components are necessary (resolving cases/problems, interviews, etc.). Part of the research participants negatively evaluate the length of a mandatory internship, necessary for “entering” legal profession and mention the necessity of increasing its duration. The legal clinic that plays one of the significant roles in becoming a qualified lawyer and developing practical skills (which is a guarantee for gaining a place at the labor market); legal clinic

remains one of the important alternatives for making up for the deficite of practical knowledge in the universities. However, the labor market lacks an information on a legal clinic. Apart from that, not every university has a legal clinic and the capacity of student enrollment is limited due to the lack of human resources, which may be considered as its shortcoming. This is exactly why broadening a legal clinic represents one of the important issues for improvement of the qualification/knowledge of the law graduates at the labor market.

5. General Evaluation of a Problem and Recommendations 5.1. General Evaluation of a Higher Legal Education Quality in Georgia Within the project “Quality Education for Strong Institutions” the detailed analysis and research of the education quality of higher institutions was conducted. Due to the complexity of the research problem, the research may not be considered universal; however, it should be mentioned tha the research group has tried its best, within the existing resources, to cover all of the components that have an impact on the higher legal education in Georgia. Based on the analysis of the examined information the quality of the higher legal education in Georgia may be evaluated as unsatisfactory; the following indicators were selected as the determinants of a higher legal education quality: a) Regulation mechanisms of a higher legal education – both legislative and at the internal university level; b) Compliance of a higher legal education expected results with the labor market requirements; c) Educational programs; d) Academic personnel. As the research shows, the problems exist in regard of each of the above listed components; in addition, other types of problems were identified as well, which will be discussed in the current chapter. The analysis of the research outcomes have shown unusual results, because the majority of the interviewees evaluate a higher legal education as an “acute” problem; at the same time, evaluation of individual components of a legal education is more positive, rather than negative.

5.2. Problems Relating to a Higher Legal Education As noted in the previous chapter, the research of a higher legal education has reflected the problems in almost every major direction. The chapter covers an analysis of individually every problem.

5.2.1. Legislative and University-Internal Regulation of a Higher Legal Education

The higher legal education faces the same problems as a higher education system in general – in terms of a legislative regulation. Specifically, the problem relates to the conflict of interest among the expert group members and universities, seeking an accreditation/authorization. Despite a rather broad list of the conflict of interest cases in the legislation, there are particulare risks that the authorization/accreditation expert group member and a seeker might make a covert deal. Specifically, in exchange for gaining a status a university might offer future employment. To minimize this risk, it is reasonable to make a legislative clause, that would prescribe that a member of an accreditaion/authorization group does not have a right to be employed at the statusseeking university for some time after the accreditation/authorization. This will allow to avoid not only a conflict of interest at the outset, but also to avoid any kind of interest from the side of an expert group in terms of future emplyment. Another problematic issue identified in this regard is the rules of composing an accreditation council, in relation to which the opinions are diverse. Despite the fact that the research process was unable to clearly confirm or reject the existence of the risks, it would be appropriate to revise the rules of composing an accreditation council in relation to a higher legal education. Specifically, apart from the representatives of higher educational institutions, professional unions of lawyers and interest groups from various sectors must engage in the work, for example: Georgian Bar Association, the Notary Chamber of Georgia, the Ministry of Justice of Georgia, the Supreme Court of Georgia, Georgian Young Lawyers Association (as a representative of the NGO sector and one of the largest professional union of lawyers). We consider that engagement of the above interest groups in the work of an accreditation council will positively affect the quality of a higher legal education in Georgia, since the determination of a quality and its evaluation will be conducted by the institutions, which are the first “receivers” of the human resources prepared by higher educational institutions. Apart from the mentioned, the research process has identified the problems that directly relate to a legal education, since the legal profession is “regulated” according to the law, alongside with the professions of a doctor and a teacher. Despite this provision, there is still no law on the higher legal education in Georgia, while other regulated professions have already fallen within the legislative frames. In opinion of the research group, introduction of a special law on a higher legal education will significantly support definition of a quality education and standards and it will also be possible to write out the problematic issues which in reality hinder the development of a legal profession in a country. Due to the legal education being demanded and due to the large number of law faculty students, the research team got interested in a so-called “beginning level of a legal education” problem. In case if the quality of law studies improves in the schools, as well as if the uniform national exams include

law (or a relating discipline) as one of the optional topics, the prospective entrants will be far more prepared to engage in the educational process. Thich will naturally positively affect the quality of a legal education, since an education is not a one-sided process. Many thinkg depend upon not only the provider of an education, but also upon the receiver of an education. As for the mechanisms of internal university regulation of a higher legal education, first of all, the problem of systematization of an education system should be noted. Specifically, the problem is that a university practically does not define or regulate the education methodology. The examination of the university syllabuses has clearly shown that the topic is paid very little attention. This tendency is especially acute in the state universities, in which:  



The teaching methods list almost all of the possible methods existing in general, while it is impossible to practically apply all of them within a lecture week; Only a classic lecture is indicated as a teaching method. The goals are not coherent with the methods. It is impossible to achieve such results as development of research skills through the lectures only; The expected study results are not thoroughly analyzed and detailed, it is not defined – which subject will result in which outcome. In some cases it is not written and in some cases they are indicated too generally (knowledge and awareness, ability to apply the knowledge in practice, learning skills, values).

Due to the above it is important to elaborate a specific approach towards the teaching methodology. It is important to elaborate the teaching methods of specific disciplines and their monitoring systems. The issue of regulating educational programs is also important. In case of both private and state universities:   

The program does not reflect the cohrence of a material-technica base (infrastructure). It is only indicated very generally that the material-technical base is in compliance; There is a general indication about a library, saying that it complies with the requirements; however, the description, characteristics, number of books (etc.) is not indicated); The credit distribution system is incoherent.

Apart from the above, there is lack of optional subjects, which as reflected from the foreign practice of the legal education, is one of the important preconditons for a quality education. Solving the mentioned problem, again, requires elaboration of a uniform standard of education, compliance with which should be mandatory for both private and state higher educational institutions. It is also important to elaborate operable mechanisms of monitoring to ensure that the written standards do not remain written on the paper and that they are implemented in practice. This issue could be regulated by the legislation on a higher legal education.

As a conclusion, it could be said that it is important to really regulate the legal profession in Georgia; however, this should be conducted at the expense of freedom of the educational institutions. As much as the profession of a lawyer is the most important to establish fairness and supremacy of law, the quality legal education must become a state policy. In this context, the research group considers the German model to be acceptable, in which the higher legal education represents an integral part of the justice policy. As for the regulation itself, the research team considers that the most optimal solution is engaging the “interest groups” into the process of defining the quality of legal education and the supervision. An American model is intersting as well, in which the state delegates its functions upon non-governmental actors, while simultaneously maintaining an education as a priority element of its policy.

5.2.2. Coherence of a Higher Legal Education with the Labor Market Requirements

The main goal of a higher legal education system is “supplying” the labor market with qualified (competent) human resources. As the qualitative research within the project has demonstrated, the higher educational system in Georgia, very often, is unable to achieve the goal; therefore the quality of a higher legal education in Georgia is lower than desired. The labor market requiremets (expected to be fulfilled by the persons that have legal education), named by the groups participating in the research may be summed up in a following way:        

According to the research, majority of the graduates on the labor market does not meet the above criteria. This is why one of the participants of a research has mentioned that development of certain skills should start from the school. It is notable that this problem was mentioned during the review of the legislative regulations of a legal education. For resolving this problem it is important to deepen the relations among the employers and educational institutions and for them to elaborate joint projects - the first steps have already been made – that is, the memorandums have been signed, the implementation of which is no less important (not only for a student to receive an information on the market requirements from the first sources, but also for the professors/lecturers and the system to gradually shift towards adjusting per market needs).

Usually, signing memorandums among various entities and higher educational institutions has a PR campaign nature and is less likely to be implemented in practice. The memorandum conditions themselves are too broad and do not contain any obligations. For improving the situation, it is necessary to change this approach. While examining the labor market, the most important component, the deficite of which was underlined by each group of the research is – lack of practical experience (relates to both students and professors/lecturers). While the students more or less satisfy the level of knowledge that they receive in the universities, the quality of the university-provided knowledge itself and its compliance with the contemporary standard and labor market demands is disputable. Since the educational programs in universities are not oriented at practical work they are unable to provide students with skills necessary for their profession, so the students have to make up for the deficite (for example, through internship, legal clinic). As for satisfying minimum competences, in this regard the research has identified the weakeness of the practical component of the knowledge. Despite the fact that the labor market is full of lawyers, it is difficult to find qualified persons. This is due to the reason that higher educational institutions do not develop the students’ relevant skills and, as lawyers have noted, in a majority of cases, the outdated methods of teaching are applied. The research has revealed that at the current stage, application of contemporary/interactive methods depends upon the specific individuals (professors/lecturers) and is not a characteristic to a system in general. It is notable that this tendency was revealed during the analysis of programs and syllabusses of higher educational institutions; therefore, elaboration of a uniform educational standard, its adjustment per labor market, the in general – the needs of a country and existing challenges gains particular importance. As a conclusion it could be said that a compliance of a higher legal education in Georgia with the labor market demands highly depends upon the effective regulation of the profession and upon elaboration of a comprehensive standard. Contemporary educational methods, effective mechanisms of their implementation, practice-oriented teaching – are the components that must be regulated under the legislation on education and under the internal regulatory acts of the universities. Another problem identified in this regard is lack of communication among employers, state and educational institutions. Therefore, the importance of the engagement of various interest groups in the quality determination and regulation should be once again stressed, as indicated for a number of times in the previous chapters.

5.2.3. Educational Programs

It is important to review this issue not only in terms of only internal regulations mechanisms of universities, but also, in general terms. During the quantitative research a clear tendency was revealed; specifically, the tendency that higher educational facilities are not less likely to offer novelties to the new masters’ students. Every third of the interviewed masters’ student disagrees that the masters program offers students new (different) subjects in comparison with the bachelors’ program. One fourth of the interviewed bachelors think that the study program does not allow student to receive narrow/concentrated specialization and that preparation of bachelor works are not seriously paid attention to at the faculty. The research process has revealed problems in the research components of the masters and doctors programs. At each stage of study, there are problems in terms of teaching a foreign language. The mentioned, just like the issue of narrow specialization, was acute in the group discussion process as well. Due to the above it is reasonable for the higher legal education institutions to focus on resolving this problem. It is preferable to elaborate certain standard for resolving the problem and its monitoring mechanism in terms of language teaching and specialization. An existence of this problem also indicates the lack of communication among the employers and educational institutions, therefore in this case we reiterate the same recommendation that we mentioned on the employment. Based on the analysis of both employer requirements and the educational programs it may be concluded, that “entering the profession” does not mean an employment. Therefore, the fact that a student can pass the exam required for entering the profession cannot be a basic determining criteria of education quality, since the requirements for entering the profession usually are the same as the knowledge received at the universities. Therefore, the less is an education quality in the universities, the lower standard of entering the profession there will be.

5.2.4. Academic Personnel

Qualification of an academic personnel is probably one of the central indicators of a quality of the higher legal education. Naturally, the research would not have been able to and the researh team would not have given itself a right to question the competence and qualification of individual professors/lecturers. The research team has examined those objective factors which might have a significant impact on the effective performance of the duties by the proffessors/lecturers. One of the most important trends, revealed within the research is that the same person works in a number of universities, in various regions of Georgia; if we think realistically, it is very often impossible for one person to conduct such a scale of work. The fact that the number of law faculties in higher educational institutions in Georgia exceeds the number of academic personnel may be considered as one of the reasons, causing the problem. In difference with the foreign practices, a vast majority of educational institutions have a law faculty, which is caused by – on the one hand,

large demand for the legal education, on the other hand with the fact that this demand and therefore the number of law students makes law faculty a “breadwinner” of an educational institution. Optimization of a higher legal education system is one of the primary effective ways for resolving the problem. This means, on the one hand – strict monitoring of an education quality at the legal faculties, while on the other hand, giving incentives for an academic personnel for them to be able to satisfy their materials needs by working at one place and not have to work in multiple places to survive. It is also important to create incentives for an academic personnel in the regions. Unfortunately, there is a serious deficite of an academic personnel in the regions.

5.3. Other Tendencies The research process has revealed tendencies, focusing on which is particularly important. First of all it should be noted that the higher educational institutions in regions ar far more critically evaluated in the research than the institutions in Tbilisi. In terms of legal education the grave situation in the regions is not a new thing. There are not only logistical problems (material-technical base, library, etc.) but also lack of human resources. To resolve the problem, it is important for the state to make the legal education one if its priorities and draw more resources towards resolving this problem. It is necessary to make incentives for the human resources, to create comfortable conditions for them to prevent the braindrain of the professionals from the regions and to make the Tbilisi-based preofessionals interested in working in the regions. As a conclusion we might once again reiterate that a higher legal education has a special role and place in building the law-based state. The quality legal education is the precondition for the state power of those institutions, who’s duty it is to establish democratic principles and supremacy of law. Therefore, taking care on the quality of the legal education is the duty of not only the state or higher institutions, but also of an entire civil society. We would like to express the belief that this research will be one of the first, but not the last step forwards in this regard.