No manuals. No simulations. No instructor. Just vibes and best guesses.
That’s what unstructured AI training looks like in legal practice right now. And it’s exactly why so many lawyers feel overwhelmed, underprepared, or worse—paralyzed.
The issue isn’t curiosity. Most lawyers want to learn. The issue is time, relevance, and direction. Without structured guidance, AI literacy becomes just another thing on an already packed plate—and one that feels optional until it’s suddenly not.
🧭 That’s the shift this piece by Nabiha Khwaja at Legaltech Hub gets right:
AI training isn’t about learning prompts or memorizing product names. It’s about building professional fluency—the same way we teach cross-examination, risk negotiation, or contract drafting. It’s about learning to supervise AI, not just use it.
Look at how Suffolk Law is mandating GenAI training for 1Ls. Or how D2 Legal and SimuLaw are building real-world scenarios that blend law, ethics, and judgment. These aren’t check-the-box webinars. They’re practice-ready frameworks that meet lawyers where they are—and where clients need them to be.
So let’s stop treating AI like a faster version of legal research.
And start treating it like what it is: a strategic partner that’s changing how we reason, argue, and advise.
Ask yourself (and your team):
- Are we training to use AI—or to understand it?
- Can we spot when it’s “confidently wrong”?
- Do we know how to make it challenge our thinking, not just speed it up?
Training is how we stay the trusted voice in the room—even when the machines start talking louder. 🧠💬
Comment, connect and follow for more commentary on product counseling and emerging technologies. 👇
