But did u notice, Gandhi never said nething should be done against the evil. All the said “Dont talk evil, Dont see evil, Dont hear eveil”.. There is no monkey that says “Fight Evil too”

As for the “anything” after. It is true that a large part of the expanded options stretched out global careers IN LAW. But there were also so many parallel streams — people pursuing business degrees, PhDs, international policy practices. With each new batch, more graduates use the 5 years as a liberal arts education (or sorts) rather than a purely legal education. Does this respond accurately to the initial goal behind these schools? Probably not. Is it a good outcome despite not meeting the initial goal? My answer would be Yes. And No. I think it is a good outcome for education more generally (especially given the dearth of higher education opportunities in the country) but its probably not the best education model to service the Indian courts.

I love your point about cultures and identities. What I hope to work into my long term research is how exactly this sort of emerging global culture gets created (and re-created) in these schools and this forms hierarchies within the institution. So in this sense, they are exactly like the IITs/IIMs. While the options are similar (global, well paying, culturally and socially elite), so are the experiences (extremely selective processes of entry, liberally dominant stereotypes, sense of differentiation from the rest). What would really interest me is to see if the sorters that bring students to these schools are different (i.e., how accessible are these law schools to non-english speaking, middle class Indian kids in comparison with the elite tech schools, like the IIT?).

Thanks again for your comments!

Swethaa.