한·일 로스쿨 평가에 관한 비교·분석

This research aims to compare between evaluation in law school from the Korean Law School Evaluation Committee and evaluation in college of jurisprudence from the National Research Foundation of Japan. Especially, this research focused on delving into suggestion among Japanese evaluations through analyzing the common and difference points about two institutions. For achieving purpose of this study, we compared and analyzed evaluation procedure with methods and evaluation in performance of education. Therefore, the result of study is as follows. There are three common points of two institutions. First of all, two nations introduce law school system for training various jurists. Second, two nations operate a certification system for managing a quality of education in law. Third, two nations adopt the Five Levels of Evaluation Model. The next is to look into differences in evaluation about Korean and Japanese law school along strong and weakness points. Strong point of Korean law school is that evaluation in educational environment conditions and systems are more systematic than that of the Japanese Bar Association, on the other hand, weakness point of Korean law school is that the Korean law school has a lack of understanding about an evaluation in knowledge and capability about students who finished required courses at the Korean law school. Finally, the Japanese Bar Association’s evaluation in college of jurisprudence has suggested that it is important to increase an understanding about Japanese evaluation in performance of education and set the required learning objectives for becoming jurist. By evaluating an accomplishment with reflecting suggestions in learning process, the Japanese Bar Association can contribute normalization of law education. This essay emphasizes that evaluation in Korean law school should be converted into practical evaluation of whether the graduates have acquired knowledge and competence that they should have as a jurist.