Law students graduate without AI skills, but the legal profession expects them

“The gap between what universities teach and what the profession demands is larger than ever. Especially in the field of AI.”

Law students are entering the labor market with insufficient practical skills, particularly regarding AI. Only four out of ten students indicate that their education makes them proficient in using generative AI tools. Furthermore, less than a third feel confident in client counseling or case management.

This is according to the Bloomberg Law Path to Practice research (2026), a large-scale survey of 1,558 practicing attorneys, 264 law students, and 79 faculty members in the United States. The study highlights a clear divide: education focuses on theory, while the profession demands immediate employability, with AI skills as a top priority.

The gap between education and practice

The research reveals a fundamental problem. Law schools spend the vast majority of study time on theoretical subjects. A third-year student takes an average of twelve theoretical courses compared to only five practice-oriented courses. This ratio does not align with employer expectations.

Key findings from the research:

• Law students take more than twice as many theoretical courses as practice-oriented ones.
• Only 36% of third-year students feel proficient in client counseling and client contact.
• 64% of third-year students have gained experience with (simulated) clients, but this means more than a third completely lack that experience.
• Nearly all third-year students (86%) seek paid work alongside their studies to bridge the gap.

The result: students enter the labor market with a solid legal foundation but lack the practical skills that employers expect immediately.

The profession expects AI skills from day one

Expectations from law firms are high and specific. The research shows that employers expect new hires to be productive with AI immediately.

The most important AI skills employers expect from new legal professionals:

• Source verification of AI-generated material: 76% of employers expect this from the first day of work.
• Reviewing work products: 63% expect new hires to master this independently.
• Understanding legal ethics regarding AI: 63% cite this as essential.
• General AI literacy: 46% expect basic knowledge of AI applications.

At the same time, 56% of practicing attorneys state that AI is developing faster than they can keep up with. Three-quarters believe that more experienced attorneys are insufficiently proficient with legal technology. This creates a paradoxical situation: employers expect AI skills from new hires, while many experienced attorneys do not possess those skills themselves.

Universities are lagging behind in AI education

The research also focuses on educational institutions, and the findings are telling. The integration of AI into the curriculum depends heavily on the individual university and even the individual instructor.

The state of affairs at universities in America:

• Only 11% of universities require faculty to undergo AI training.
• Two-thirds offer voluntary workshops, but nearly a quarter of faculty do not participate, even when the offer is available.
• Only 30% of universities have an institution-wide AI policy. In 13%, any formal policy is entirely absent.
• Nearly three out of ten faculty members indicate that their university offers no AI-focused courses at all.

The result is a patchwork of initiatives. Some universities lead the way with specialized AI courses and mandatory training, while others allow students to graduate without ever having worked with a legal AI tool.

Students are concerned but optimistic

Despite the gap in education, law students are not pessimistic. On the contrary: 73% consider a legal career to be stable. Nearly a quarter aim for a position at a large law firm, followed by a role in the public interest (18%).

At the same time, there are legitimate concerns:

• 48% of students feel that AI is growing faster than they can keep up with.
• 42% fear that AI will reduce the number of available jobs.
• Two-thirds believe that more experienced attorneys are insufficiently proficient with technology.
• Only 40% of third-year students feel proficient in using generative AI as a legal tool.

Students are trying to bridge the gap themselves. They seek internships, research positions, and other paid work experience. But the question remains whether these brief practical experiences are sufficient to develop the AI skills expected in practice.

What does this mean for the Dutch legal sector?

The Bloomberg Law research focuses on the United States, but the findings are directly relevant to the Dutch legal sector. The challenges are similar: in the Netherlands, the emphasis in law school also lies on theory and doctrine, while the demand for practice-oriented and technological skills is growing.

For law firms and legal departments in the Netherlands, there are three points of focus:

1. Invest in structured AI onboarding for new hires. Do not assume that graduates bring these skills from university. Offer a concrete induction program focusing on AI source verification, legal ethics, and the effective use of AI tools.
2. Make AI proficiency part of the job profile. Explicitly state which AI skills the organization expects upon entry and what development is offered. This helps with recruitment as well as guiding professional growth.
3. Encourage collaboration between education and practice. Law firms and legal departments that actively collaborate with universities on the curriculum contribute to better-trained new hires and simultaneously strengthen their own position in the labor market.

Conclusion: the gap is becoming a risk

The Bloomberg Law Path to Practice research reveals an uncomfortable truth: legal education is insufficiently preparing students for the technological reality of modern legal practice. While employers expect new hires to verify AI sources and review work products from day one, many graduates lack exactly those skills.

The solution does not lie with a single party. Universities must modernize their curriculum, employers must invest in mentorship, and students must proactively develop their skills. Technology waits for no one. Those who do not invest in AI skills now—whether students, faculty, or firms—risk falling behind in a sector that is changing rapidly. The gap between education and practice is not new. But AI is making that gap larger, more visible, and more urgent. It is time to bridge that gap, not tomorrow, but today.