The Role of Law Schools in Cultivating a Professional Identity in the Era of AI

The Center for Professionalism congratulates FSU College of Law 3L Sheldon Burnell for winning the annual "Raising the Bar" professionalism essay contest.

---

By Sheldon Burnell 3L, FSU College of Law

Sheldon Burnell

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has ushered in a technological renaissance reshaping industries and the globe in ways not seen in centuries. AI is well on its way to become a fixture in both legal education and practice. Students use it to enhance their study practices, generate case briefs, and refine their writing, while practitioners use it for legal research, contract drafting, due diligence, discovery review, file management, and proofreading motions and briefs. While the precise direction and scale of AI’s integration into the profession remain unknown, one thing is clear: AI will play an influential role in the future of law.

Although AI will likely improve the practice in many ways, it raises several complex questions as well. Among these questions is the role AI will play in shaping a lawyer’s professional identity—their sense of purpose, commitment to justice, and personal well-being. To ensure that professional identity evolves in tandem with technological advancement, law schools should teach students to think critically about AI’s role in practice, particularly how it intersects with ethical obligations. Equally important is reinforcing the indispensable role of human judgment, especially as legal work becomes increasingly shaped by AI. Legal educators should also guide students in identifying areas where AI can support the development of professional identity—such as enhancing access to justice or improving efficiency—while remaining mindful of contexts where reliance on AI should be limited to preserve the human-centered nature of lawyering.

Integrating AI into Legal Education to Support Professional Identity

First, in order to integrate AI into legal education and law practice to support development of professional identity, law students and professors should routinely engage with AI technology. For example, professors could present complex legal questions to AI software and use its responses as a foundation for class discussions. Students and professors could assess whether AI-generated answers align with established legal reasoning, case law, and ethical principles, and identify any biases, inaccuracies, or pitfalls embedded in AI’s analysis. These discussions will deepen students’ understanding of AI’s capabilities and limitations and reinforce the necessity of human oversight in legal practice. By critically engaging with AI in an academic setting, law students can develop the discernment needed to integrate the technology responsibly.Additionally, law schools should inform students on controversies surrounding liability in AI-assisted legal work and the risks of utilizing AI-generated legal research. By equipping students with a clear understanding of the professional and ethical ramifications of using this technology in practice, law schools can help foster sound judgment and ethical awareness. Perhaps most critically, law schools must emphasize that human judgment is indispensable when working with AI. As the technology becomes more integrated into legal practice, the ability to navigate its use with discernment will be a defining feature of the ethical lawyer.

One way for law schools to promote the understanding of AI is to offer courses that examine how AI functions, how it is regulated, and how it intersects with professional and ethical obligations. As a second-year law student at FSU Law, I took a course called AI and the Law, which covered these dimensions. The course began with an understanding of how AI technology works as an algorithmic system. The course emphasized the importance of recognizing AI’s inherent biases and evaluating its accuracy rather than assuming it to be infallible.

This course also directly addressed the ethical implications of AI. The course taught students about the Florida Bar’s Proposed Advisory Opinion 24-1, which outlines many ethical implications of AI use in legal practice. For example, the opinion strongly cautions against inputting client information into third-party generative AI systems, especially those that are cloud-based or self-learning, without first obtaining the client’s informed consent, as this may risk unauthorized disclosure in violation of Rule

4-1.6. Lawyers must also maintain competence under Rule 4-1.1 by understanding the capabilities and limitations of the AI tools they use. Under Rule 4-5.3, AI should be treated similarly to a non-lawyer assistant, meaning lawyers must verify the accuracy of AI-generated content and remain ultimately responsible for the final work product. The opinion also described the duties under Rule 4-3.3 (candor to the tribunal), Rule 4-3.1 (meritorious claims), and Rule 4-4.1 (truthfulness to others), warning that AI hallucinations can result in ethical violations if lawyers fail to catch false citations.

Lawyers must also avoid improper billing practices under Rule 4-1.5, ensuring that any efficiencies gained through AI are not misrepresented in time records. Additionally, the opinion highlights concerns regarding the use of AI in advertising and client intake, particularly the risk that chatbots could mislead prospective clients or create unintended attorney-client relationships. This course exemplified how law schools can provide a curriculum on AI and the law, teaching students about both important technological and ethical underpinnings of using this new tool in practice.

A final way that AI can be used to promote a lawyer’s professional identity is by using the technology to increase access to justice. One of AI’s greatest benefits is its ability to improve efficiency within the legal profession. While this increased efficiency can certainly boost law firm profitability, AI should also be utilized to expand access to justice. ABA Model Rule 6.1 encourages lawyers to provide pro bono services, and AI can be used to aid in this goal by allowing attorneys to take on more pro bono cases without sacrificing their primary workload. Law schools using AI responsibly can contribute to an increased access to justice by incorporating AI technology into clinical programs. Under the guidance of clinical instructors, students could use AI tools to aid in the service of underrepresented communities. By introducing students to these tools in a structured environment, law schools can promote and cultivate a norm that lawyers view these technologies not only to improve personal efficiency, but also as a tool that can be used to enhance access to justice for those who need it.

Beyond AI: Strengthening Professional Identity Through Human Connection and Well-Being Practices

While AI is reshaping legal work, law schools must emphasize that legal practice requires judgment, discretion, and moral reasoning—skills that AI cannot replace. ABA Model Rule 2.1 reinforces that a lawyer must exercise independent professional judgment and consider moral, economic, and social factors in advising clients. This rule should serve as a reminder that AI cannot replace the lawyer’s role in providing holistic, human-centered counsel.

Although AI technology may allow law firms to implement AI-driven client interaction tools, law schools should reinforce the importance of human connection in legal practice. Clients seek legal representation not just for technical expertise but for compassion, advocacy, and emotional intelligence. Law schools can address this by educating students on active listening, client communication, emotional intelligence, and the ethical lawyer-client relationship. These teachings will help emphasize the human element of lawyering and help ensure that future lawyers do not rely on AI at the expense of genuine client relationships.

While AI can ease workloads, it may also intensify efficiency pressures, creating the expectation that lawyers must constantly do more in less time. To help students build a sustainable professional identity, law schools should offer courses that emphasize lawyer well-being alongside technological competence. During my second year at FSU Law, in addition to the course I took on AI, I also took a course called Lawyers as Transformational Leaders. Taking these courses contemporaneously provided a helpful contrast, while the AI course focused on technological advancement, the leadership course emphasized professional identity and well-being. The leadership course reinforced that success in the legal profession isn’t measured solely by productivity but also by well-being, integrity, and human connection. Together, these courses reminded me that while AI may largely shape the future of legal work, it is ultimately people—clients, communities, and the lawyers themselves—who must remain at the center.

Law schools can promote sustainable professional identity by teaching students about mindfulness, stress management, movement, sleep hygiene, and related well-being practices. These tools help students understand that well-being is essential to ethical, effective lawyering. By prioritizing well- being alongside technological fluency, legal education can prepare students to thrive in a profession shaped by innovation, without losing sight of the human core that defines it.

AI will inevitably become a permanent fixture in the legal profession, but it must not overshadow the core principles that define ethical lawyering. Law schools have a responsibility to train students in the ethical, responsible, and professional use of AI while reinforcing the values that form the foundation of legal practice. This means encouraging AI literacy while emphasizing human oversight and judgment, leveraging AI for efficiency while ensuring it expands access to justice, and carving out space to emphasize lawyer well-being to foster sustainable legal careers. By promoting the ethical, responsible, and balanced use of AI, law schools can encourage technological fluency while also maintaining an emphasis on development of a strong, positive, and sustainable professional identity.