Having academic rigour doesn't mean we have to stress students: Prof Sarasu Thomas, Manipal Law School Director

Prof Sarasu Esther Thomas joins a long list of National Law School of India University (NLSIU) faculty to other leadership positions at other universities.

After spending nearly 25 years as a faculty member at her alma mater, she was recently appointed as Director of the Manipal Law School at Bengaluru.

In this interview with Bar & Bench's Hiranya Bhandarkar, Prof Thomas speaks about how law schools can better prepare students for the legal profession, the factors behind faculty retention, mental health of law students, and more.

Edited excerpts follow.

Hiranya Bhandarkar (HB): What inspired you to take up the role of Director at Manipal Law School?

Prof Sarasu Thomas (ST): A lot of people were very surprised because I have been at NLSIU for almost 30 years. I think it was a chance to do something different. Manipal University is currently at NIRF Rank 4 as a university, not as a law school, as it is still very new. It is an institution of eminence; most institutions of eminence are in the public sector. It has many good institutions, and I thought it would be good to explore how a law school fits in the larger ecosystem. All my life I have been - whether as a student or in my working life - with the NLSIU, which is a single-discipline university.

HB: What are your immediate priorities at Manipal Law School? How do you plan to improve the academic environment?

ST: The Manipal Law School is a fledgling institute and there are two parts to what we are going to do in the next few years. One is to grow fairly quickly to take an equal place with the established institutions that are already well-known. So, unlike some institutions which may focus on increasing numbers to show growth, we have not increased so much. We are increasing based on our capabilities. Before admissions are done, there's a long meeting to decide what should we offer. We have teachers who have studied from good institutions abroad like Harvard. So, getting faculty is not the challenge that I thought it would be. It is quite easy to increase admission numbers, but there are many other factors to bear in mind.

We need a good library, because the campus is still new. We also want to ensure that there is a link between the number of people we can take in and a robust placement process. We don't want a large number of students or even a few students who don't get a job at the end of their degree. We want to consolidate and have quality over quantity.

The undergraduate BA. LL.B. and BBA. LL.B. programs are revised very frequently to introduce new facets to the program. We live in a multi-disciplinary campus, so there are already strong links to the industry. We also want to increase the foreign exposure that students would get. Introducing global semesters where students can go out as a group accompanied by a teacher, to ensure true comparative law teaching. We want to develop exchange programs. A lot of national law schools have exchange programs, but with fewer students. MAHE has over 200 MoUs with different universities, and many of them have law schools as well. Also, being an institution of eminence, we can have foreign faculty which other institutions, including NLUs, cannot.

Our LL.M. programs are very small, but we offer niche subject areas. We offer subjects that are not available anywhere else in the country, like Construction Law.

We also want to develop better links with stakeholders, with Bar Council members for instance. I had a great time working with them when I was the Registrar at NLSIU, and would seek their continued support for this new institution.

The theme for MAHE this year is research. So we don't want to be just a good law school for students, but we also want to be recognised for our research. I am keen to broadening areas for access to justice, for instance, to questions particularly relating to incarceration and my own area, of course, is gender, and I certainly want to start something on that. We will soon start writing proposals and seek funds from both government and other funders for this.

We have just started PhD admissions, and have some good candidates. We hope to broaden that as well. We want to have a more diverse student body. Our campus is completely accessible - washrooms, hostels and everything is accessible. We have students from all over the country and a few students from abroad as well.

HB: Every law school aims to make sure their students are ready for the legal industry. However, the job market today is not very favourable. How does MLS plan on tackling this?

ST: We are reaching out to the industry and planning a good internship program and tying up with institutions. We are trying to get trainings like how to give an interview, how to write a CV, you know the small things which make a difference. Even for one job, even if there are a hundred applications, it makes a difference if you are able to project yourself properly and what you want in a genuine manner. There are different things we are doing to increase students' chances of getting jobs. I am also lucky because having taught at NLSIU for so many years, so many of my students have reached out to me and offered to help. I certainly hope to reach out to them for advice and help to ensure our students get jobs. The alumni of any institution is its greatest strength, and right now, we (MLS) are too young to have an alumni group yet.

This is also why I said we are expanding very slowly. It's been three years, and we have roughly around 300 students. We are not in a hurry to expand, as Prof Madhava Menon used to say. He never wanted to start yet another law school. So MLS doesn't want to be yet another law school where we are churning out graduates. Students here should have a good experience and hopefully get good jobs after that.

I understand that law schools are mushrooming; every university has a law school since it is easy to set up. The law cannot function in isolation today. When NLUs were started with NLS, the reason was that law was not considered a good profession. If you didn't get admission anywhere, then you joined law. Prof Menon did not want to start a law school in a university where the medical college or the engineering college would get prominence and not the law school. He felt having an independent law school would be the best thing for law. He was extremely successful, and you see so many NLUs today. He is the biggest reason why law is seen as a good and viable profession today.

That also had its disadvantage, as being in an NLU, you are not exposed to other disciplines. At Manipal, they encourage cross-discipline learning. We have constant meetings with all the directors together to see how we can work together. For example, you can be studying Patents with engineering students or we can collaborate with the health sciences to do an elective on law and health. This inter-disciplinary approach to learning can be most effective for law students.

Corporate law is a fad regardless of NLU or not. However, today, there are multiple avenues. I think when students interact with more disciplines in the same campus, they can get to know of more avenues where legal services may be required, but not in the traditional way that we expect legal services to be delivered.

Recently, the Srishti Manipal Institute of Design, Art and Technology collaborated with the Manipal Law School to bring about an excellent book on constitutional rights. It is designed like a comic and is fantastic. That kind of exposure law students will not get if they are in a university that only offers law.

HB: You spoke about the NLU Model and how Dr Menon had envisioned it. Do you think it has achieved its aim to revolutionise legal education?

ST: Yes, definitely. Imitation is the best form of flattery. There are so many law schools coming up. We know it is a successful model and he professionalised legal education. Prof Madhava Menon changed it from being something you studied part-time, in an evening college or without attending classes, to something that good students aimed for as a career. It also coincides with how careers in law have changed. Earlier, the only avenue was practicing in court. Today, only a fraction of law students go into court practice because there are so many types of jobs available elsewhere. NLSIU was a successful experiment, and it revolutionised legal education in India as we know it today.

HB: Why would a student choose a private law school like MLS over an NLU?

ST: There are many reasons for students picking a private university. A good law school is a good one whether it is private or an NLU. If we look at what pushes students, we also have to look at what pushes parents, because it is not just the student who has complete agency to take that decision. For parents that are investing money in their child's education, they want returns, some satisfaction that there would be a job at the end of this long road. People would choose a law school not only if it is an NLU or a private law school, so we see a fairly good demand for private law schools as well; not just for NLUs. NLUs which are not ranked that high are not preferred over a private law school as well. That distinction between a private and an NLU has blurred.

There is an assumption that private law schools charge a lot of fees. However, MLS' tuition fees are quite nominal. There are very many old, established private law schools even in Bangalore and other cities that charge very nominal fees. I think the ranking of the law school or university is very important. They will find MAHE is NIRF Rank 4 and an institution of eminence, which none of the other law schools are yet. That might prompt students to take admission in some of the private institutions. There is plenty of information out there for people to read up on and figure out for themselves despite all the advertising.

HB: Are there any scholarships available at MLS?

ST: We do have merit-cum-means scholarship. I do not know the details, but definitely there are some scholarships available.

HB: How does MLS plan to retain its faculty amidst a perceived crunch across law schools?

ST: There is this antiquated assumption that in a public university, there is job security and you can stay on until retirement. As I told you earlier, there are excellent faculty members here at MAHE who have been here for a long time. When you look at faculty retention, there are many reasons and that is what we need to see, because even at the NLS, many of the faculty are quite new and most are still on probation. If you came about six or seven years ago, the faculty that were there then and the ones now have changed drastically. This could be because of many reasons, one is that the pay and designation became important. There can be cases where some private colleges can pay or give a higher designation. Manipal does not to do that. It has clear rules on how you qualify to be associate professor or professor. At some colleges, they are willing to give you a higher designation even though you do not qualify according to the University Grants Commission (UGC) criteria. The designation and the pay might be pushing a lot of people to take up different jobs.

Faculty are also quite mobile now, they don't mind travelling anywhere. But as they grow older, they would like to settle down. Many may choose to live where their partners are or they have aging parents and they want to move back to their home city.

There might be separation initiated by the institution itself; the institution lets faculty go because of inadequate performance and that could be a valid reason for not retaining faculty.

The biggest thing, I think, is job satisfaction. If employees are happy in one place, and they feel that there is job satisfaction and challenges at work - but not so much that they burden you - they will stay. The crippling weight of responsibilities, (when) you work so hard and nobody appreciates what you do, can happen in institutions, both private and public. That causes a lot of people to leave their job or be extremely unhappy at their workplaces. A happy, satisfying workplace has something to do with the pay, but not everything.

There must also be chances for growth in different directions. So you do find people moving, even among NLUs, to the private sector and vice versa. Many old assumptions don't hold weight. Now a lot of pensions that NLUs have may be paid with LIC or with the National Pension Scheme which also private institutions have. There are also assumptions that NLUs will give a paid PhD leave or paid sabbatical leave, and that is not true. A lot of public institutions do not give this leave so many people may choose to be in a private institution which may not have this leave.

There may also be clashes, as NLUs are very small places and are dependent on who the Vice-Chancellor is at the time. If a faculty member does not get along with the Vice-Chancellor then it can be very uncomfortable. It can be the case in a private institution also, but in larger institutions there are other mechanisms in place to deal with workplace tensions which may not necessarily exist in very small institutions.

Faculty retention is an issue everywhere and not just for MLS. Faculty can write research proposals and have a long term investment in seeing their research projects through and guaranteeing that their research projects will not be touched by anyone else which is something that I think even most law schools may not necessarily do. The other is encouraging journals and specific issues of journals. Quality law journals that are Indian are very few. We plan to bring out a good journal which will in a few years be SCOPUS indexed and which involves a lot of faculty who are interested in writing so we want to cater to a large number of people. MAHE also has the option of hiring teachers who are research faculty only, who may not teach but will have the same pay scale as that of an associate or assistant professor. There is a lot of flexibility here in getting faculty who are interested in a variety of different things and I hope that we will do well in retaining them. MAHE institutions have done it before so I don't see any reason why the law school should not.

HB: In the context of students facing mental health issues in law schools, what do you think are the most pressing issues administrations face today?

ST: I think mental health is something that is faced by everybody, we are only acknowledging it today. It's not that the students of this generation have mental health issues, it was there but it was not being addressed. It starts with the first year, when students feel separated from their home environment, and homes in India can be very close and do everything for the child. And when the young adult comes to a law school, it becomes quite a frightening or isolating experience. I think talking about mental health openly and having systems to help students in such situations is something that is really necessary.

Besides that, I think course burden should be commensurate with what students are able to do. I have been on boards of studies in many institutions and sometimes when I see the recommended readings, they would have given 20 books. A student cannot read that; a faculty member cannot read that in one term. I do not see the point of it, not all students will be interested in AI even though it is very popular. Many of these things should be electives and it should be less stressful for students.

Evaluation patterns must also evolve to be not only exam-focused, exams are a big stressor for students. Continuing evaluation allows the student to experiment with different forms of evaluation. For instance, have a moot problem as an evaluation, or a panel discussion on the student's thoughts on specific policy. Having academic rigour does not mean we have to necessarily stress students. This is something that we are realising now - this stress does not begin in law school but something that has come from school times.

There is a lot of comparison within the batch. So I tell students: you are not competing with your batchmates, you are competing with everyone so there is a place for you. The field of law is so broad, the universe of law students is so large that you are competing with that universe in which you are good and there is a place for everyone.

I think we also do a lot of valorisation of wealth. You are judged by how much you earn. So even at NLSIU, reporters would call and say we heard some student did so much and what do you say about the other students graduating. I say the students who I am extremely proud of are the ones who have gone into social causes. They may not be making much, but they're making a difference. Those things are what law is supposed to be. You make money but you also keep in mind the fact that you have to help out people. That's why it's called a noble profession. Of course you need a career, money is important, but you're also there to contribute to society during your life here. I think the way that we measure success must also change because every person has value and can contribute to society.

HB: What message would you give law students who plan on joining MLS or law in general?

ST: Keep in mind that law is a profession, but also think carefully before you take up law. If necessary, do attend career counselling to ensure this is the right profession for you. I always tell students when they join law, if you feel it is not for you, it is not the end of the road. You can always leave and do something else; no one is going to judge you. We also know that some students come to law later. They may have done something else and then they come to the three-year program. Our three-year program is extremely diverse. People come from so many different disciplines, and the discussions in class are very rich.

Even if you're not sure now, you can always do law later. It is not hard and fast that you have choose at this point of time. Keep in mind your best interests and what is best for you. Everyone has value and you will find a place that values you at some point of time.