MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122948347

Cold, Hard Justice Lessons from the Fleet: Innovating from the Bottom Up

2017· article· en· W3122948347 on OpenAlexaffabout
Omar Ha-Redeye

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncubatorPopularityEconomic JusticeLegal serviceMentorshipLegal practiceLegal researchService (business)Political scienceLegal professionLegal pluralismSociologyLawManagementLegal realismBusinessMarketingEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English Abstract: With law school graduates encountering increased difficulty in securing articling positions, legal incubators are an alternative way of providing practical training and mentorship opportunities for young practitioners. Not only do they have the potential to help launch careers in law, but they can also play a major role in increasing access to justice. Though legal incubators have been gaining popularity in law schools across the United States, they are still a novel concept in Canada. This article discusses the resources and practice models used by Fleet Street Law, a law practice in Toronto that evolved into the first legal incubator in Canada. The use of innovative business models allowed for greater service of low income and marginalized populations, especially on a “low-bono” rate, and also assisted in providing essential supports for racialized and minority lawyers early in their career. The flexible and innovative nature of a legal incubator was beneficial for the purposes of experimentation, but there were challenges associated with cost and long-term participation. The model of a practitioner-based incubator, as an alternative to traditional-type clinics, should be strongly considered by law schools to help address some of the market needs in the legal community today. French Abstract: Dans un contexte dans lequel les diplomes des ecoles de droit ont de plus en plus de mal a se trouver une place de stage, les incubateurs juridiques constituent une solution de rechange offrant des possibilites de formation pratique et de mentorat aux jeunes professionnels. En plus d’amorcer leur carriere en droit, ceux-ci peuvent jouer un role de premier plan pour accroitre l’acces a la justice. Bien que les incubateurs juridiques soient de plus en plus populaires dans les ecoles de droit des Etats-Unis, le concept est encore nouveau au Canada. Cet article traite des ressources et des modeles de pratique qu’utilise le cabinet Fleet Street Law, cabinet d’avocats de Toronto qui a evolue au sein du premier incubateur juridique au Canada. Grâce a des modeles d’entreprise innovateurs, il est desormais possible d’offrir davantage de services aux personnes peu fortunees et marginalisees, et ce, a un taux d’aide juridique peu eleve, ainsi que du soutien essentiel aux avocats racialises et aux avocats des collectivites minoritaires au debut de leur carriere. Si la nature souple et innovatrice de l’incubateur juridique s’est revelee avantageuse sur le plan de l’experimentation, des defis lies aux couts et a la participation a long terme doivent etre releves. Les ecoles de droit devraient envisager serieusement la possibilite de se tourner vers le modele de l’incubateur juridique comme solution de rechange aux cliniques traditionnelles afin de repondre a quelques-uns des besoins du marche dans le milieu juridique actuel.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207