Experiências de um aluno da American University (Washington, DC) na Faculdade de Direito da PUC-Rio

First off, it must be said that since law is considered a graduate course in the US, I had to take classes from the undergraduate schools at AU since I obviously do not have an undergraduate degree yet. So while at AU I decided to take classes I had actual interest in, most of them in the School of International Service.

Here at PUC they have a credit system, similar to the one at AU. This means I get to pick and choose somewhat when in my course when I take both mandatory and optional classes (unless there is a prerequisite, of course). However, the sheer amount of subjects a person has to take in Law School (and, quite frankly, in most o the other Schools, since it's something MEC institutes) makes it pretty much impossible for a student to have the time to take classes they are just interested in. What is even more problematic, the subjects that are mandatory greatly outnumber those that are optional. To put it this way: while at AU a student usually have to do X credits in the School of International Service, for example, with a large amount of subjects to pick from in order to fulfill those credits, at PUC, most of the time, you HAVE to do a specific subject, without which you simply don't graduate. Choosing classes at AU I chose those that I had great interest in. Choosing classes at PUC I basically try to avoid those professors that I know are terrible teachers (and unfortunately there are still many of these at the Law School), and pick whatever fits my schedule. While at AU I took 5 subjects tops per semester (if I took any more I wouldn't be able to keep up), I am currently taking 10 subjects this semester at PUC (and not having that much of an issue keeping up with them, even though I am also part of two research groups and the TA program, and I am working 20 hours a week).

This gets me to your question about the amount of work, which to me is one of the biggest differences. At PUC, it really depends on the professor. Last semester I literally had no homework, all my classes were lectures, and I pretty much studied for them on the eve of the exam and got really good grades. This semester some of the professors give me homework, but they are not nearly as time consuming as at AU. Even when I have homework at PUC, most of it is just writing something, there is no reading. Yeah, the professors may say you have to try to keep up with class by reading one of the manuals, but the truth is that most classes are just lecture classes, there is no dialogue with the class, and I have realized you really don't need to do the reading in order to be in class. At AU, on the order hand, I had readings for every single class. One of the more advanced classes I took had me read a whole book per week. And here is the thing: if you don't do the reading, you can't be in class. You will NOT be able to keep up, and the professors WILL call on you to criticize the reading and discuss. The way the grades are given also reflects that: at AU most of the grades are not exams, but rather papers, participation in class, and essays. At PUC, there is usually no negotiation: midterm and final.

About critical thinking: there are very, very, very few and precious classes at PUC where I was actually challenged to think critically. Most of the professors are not open to criticism of their ideas at all (even when they say they are), and tend to not take students ideas into consideration because, as they see it, "we are just students". There is a deeply ingrained culture in Brazil to this day of authoritarianism, and it contaminates the classroom. I can count on the fingers of one hand (and I have been here for five and a half years) the professors I have met and studied under at PUC who legitimately respect and take into consideration students ideas, and who give students the space to think critically about the law, the books and articles we read, or even the professor's own ideas. At AU, most (if not all) of the classes I took were discussion based, in a "Socratic" method. As I said, if we didn't do the reading, we couldn't keep up. The idea was for students to do the reading and challenge each other, to argue, discuss, and build ideas together in a critical way. One would think THIS was what law school is all about, but unfortunately most of my classes have been lecture-based, with the professor reading what the law says, telling us what the courts have decided (and even this is not usually done that much), and how the main authors interpret that law. If there are different point of views about the Law, professors will explain both of them to us. And that's it. We have to listen, write it down, write that on our exams and, by magic, you WILL get a 10. I cannot possibly tell you how frustrating that is to me. We are creating a legal culture that does not think critically about the law. And that is VERY, very dangerous, in my view.

I have to give PUC credit for one thing: the opportunities offered in Law School out of class, like research grants, the Teacher Assistant program, and the different law centers (Human Rights Center, Constitutional Law Center, and Environmental Law Center). These programs give the students who seek them amazing opportunities to do just that critical thinking in an academic environment. I have been involved with all of these centers and programs I mentioned before at one time or another during my time at school (as I said, five and a half years!), and the experience has been extraordinary. At PUC I have participated in Moot Court competitions, took part in critical thinking groups that discussed Human Rights, Freedom of Speech, Environmental Law, and have even taught a couple of classes as a TA. These activities have led me to where I am right now, in both my career and academic life, and I am grateful for them.

However, ever since I came back from the Abroad program, I have been increasingly frustrated with my school, and that's why I feel Flora's piece spoke to me so much, and I did tend to agree with her in most of it. It shouldn't take an outsider to tell us what the problems in our education system are for us to notice them, and I really feel like it's time for Brazilian students to sit down and have an honest conversation about it. I feel like both students and professors have so much room to grow academically and in their relationships, so I feel like not just the school NEEDS to step up when it comes to what they search for in professors, but also in students. A conversation would be a first step.

A disclaimer: I speak from my experiences alone, both in the Law School of PUC (so I can't speak for PUC in general, though I have heard similar reports from friends who take other courses), and in the AU Abroad program.