@inbook{01add8ce8d7e424ea0dde54cd4bd1a9d,
title = "Hacking the Priestleys",
abstract = "The Priestley 11 compulsory knowledge areas are determined by the judiciary, embodied in legislation, and enforced by the practitioners{\textquoteright} admissions boards in each state and territory. In the absence of a significant—and likely consensus—shift in the approach to law school accreditation, the Priestleys look to retain their longstanding formulation into the foreseeable future. Given Australia{\textquoteright}s top-down and dated approach to the accredited law curriculum, this chapter critiques the current curriculum regulations and reports on a project of collective reimagination of the core law curriculum—{\textquoteleft}hacking{\textquoteright} the Priestleys. In describing the variety of responses to an {\textquoteleft}ideal{\textquoteright} law curriculum, it highlights diverse conceptions of what it means to be a graduate lawyer in the context of rapid and paradigmatic social, economic, environmental, political, and technological change. All applicants must have completed a university-level qualification offered by a law school that is accredited by these bodies.",
author = "Kate Galloway and Melissa Castan and Alex Steel",
year = "2022",
doi = "10.4324/9781003175216-10",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781032006970",
series = "Emerging Legal Education",
publisher = "Routledge",
pages = "127--146",
editor = "Gibbon, {Helen } and Golder, {Ben } and Lucas Lixinski and Marina Nehme and Vines, {Prue }",
booktitle = "Critical Legal Education as a Subversive Activity",
address = "United Kingdom",
edition = "1st",
}