Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine how law school education has effects on self-assessment of competency (“competency identity”). The data was collected by questionnaire survey, which was sent to both of lawyer categories: lawyers who passed the new bar examination and those who passed the old bar examination. This paper clarifies the differences of effects of the types of the examinations on the competency identity of lawyers. Main findings are threefold: First, the estimated values of four competency identities (“legal basic competency identity,” “legal personal competency identity,” “management competency identity” and “cultivated competency identity”―conceptualized by factor analysis) of lawyers who passed the new bar examination were not statistically higher than those of lawyers who passed the old one. Second, the outcomes of the judicial research and training had positive effects on all of the four competency identities. Third, various demographic variables had significant effects on the four competency identities. These findings lead two important suggestions. First, although law school education is often criticized for leading poorer quality of lawyers, the analyses empirically demonstrate that the criticism is not always appropriate. Second, even after the establishment of the law school system, the judicial research and training has positive functions to guarantee the quality of lawyers from a viewpoint of competency identity.
