Guest Contribution: From Kevin Bashaw, MBA, Esq., CEO of Mason
The legal market is shifting faster than most institutions have prepared for. Recent data from Bloomberg Law’s Path to Practice survey makes this undeniable. Practicing attorneys clearly expect new lawyers to enter their firms able to work confidently with generative AI, particularly the fundamentals of cite‑checking and ethical application of AI outputs. Yet a significant gap remains between these expectations and what most law students feel prepared to do.
This disconnect is not a theoretical concern. It reflects broader market pressures reshaping legal services today. Demand for skilled legal professionals remains robust, with job postings climbing across law firms and corporate legal departments. Compliance roles, legal operations, and technical fluency in AI‑enabled systems now rank among the most sought‑after capabilities.
At the same time, compensation data makes a compelling point: lawyers who can marry legal expertise with AI savvy command a measurable premium in the labor market. One industry analysis found attorneys with demonstrable AI skills fetching dramatically higher advertised salaries, underscoring the market value of practical tech fluency in law.
We are also seeing the market respond institutionally. Major firms are not only piloting AI tools but investing in internal AI training academies and even acquiring legal tech teams in some cases. These moves reflect a belief that technology is not optional but central to delivering value for clients and maintaining competitive advantage.
Yet while firms innovate, legal education has been slower to adapt. Students often report AI training as peripheral or elective rather than embedded in core curricula. Too often, experiential learning around client communication, technology risk, and real‑world problem solving is treated as an add‑on rather than a central pillar.
The result is a systemic mismatch between what the market demands and what traditional legal education produces. The profession must treat this gap as a strategic priority: law schools, firms, and LegalTech providers should collaborate on curricula that integrate AI literacy with client engagement and judgment‑based skills from day one. Only then will graduates arrive equipped not just to use technology but to lead in a world where clients expect faster, smarter, and more efficient legal solutions.
The future of law will be defined by those who prepare for it today.