ABSTRACT
The Priestley 11 compulsory knowledge areas are determined by the judiciary, embodied in legislation, and enforced by the practitioners’ 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’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—‘hacking’ the Priestleys. In describing the variety of responses to an ‘ideal’ 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.
