From Mable LeongRecently, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, a former Court of Appeal judge, called for a much-needed revamp of Malaysia’s Certificate in Legal Practice and the broader legal training framework in his piece “Act now to reform CLP and legal training in Malaysia” (FMT, May 7).As someone who has gone through the CLP and later completed the Victorian Bar’s Readers’ Course in Melbourne through a scholarship from International Justice Mission Australia, I strongly agree that reform is overdue.Heavy on theory, light on practiceThe CLP is a tough and compact nine-month course. It tests five major subjects through 100% written examinations.The Professional Practice paper alone spans such topics as land law, probate, administration of estates, bankruptcy, winding up, and the Legal Profession Act, all in one paper.While preparing for the CLP builds legal knowledge and sharpens exam skills, the training is heavily academic. It emphasises what you know — not how you use it.Students must memorise statutes, case law, and procedural steps, and reproduce them under strict exam conditions, often with limited room for deeper discussion or practical application.I was fortunate to pass on my first attempt, largely due to sheer discipline. I recorded our lectures and played them while commuting, running on the treadmill, or doing chores.My walls were plastered with notes to memorise cases, and I regularly exchanged notes with friends from other tuition centres. But even with all that effort, the focus remained on recall — not readiness for real-world legal work.There were no opportunities to practise advocacy, argue bail, draft pleadings, or cross-examine witnesses. We read about practice, but didn’t practise it.A skills-based approachBy contrast, the Victorian Bar Readers’ Course in Melbourne is deliberately skills-based. Only about 40 candidates are admitted per intake, many of them experienced solicitors or mature candidates.Over nine intensive weeks, we were trained in both civil and criminal procedure, taught to draft pleadings, prepare police moots, and even manage a legal practice – particularly important in Australia, where barristers operate as sole practitioners.The experience was immersive. We conducted live advocacy exercises, examined witnesses, and received practical, personal feedback from senior barristers and judges.One of the most memorable sessions was a moot assessed by the late George Hampel KC, a former Supreme Court judge widely regarded as a pioneer in advocacy training. He often quoted Oscar Wilde’s “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” to encourage us to learn by observing skilled advocates.During one session, he pointed out that I smiled too much while cross-examining. While well-intentioned, smiling in court can undercut your authority and persuasiveness, he explained — a subtle but valuable lesson in courtroom decorum.Since I was particularly interested in human rights, I was also placed under senior barristers like Julian McMahon and Anne Hasan, both widely respected human rights advocates. Learning under their mentorship not only sharpened my legal thinking but deepened my understanding of law as a tool for justice and social impact.Bloom’s TaxonomyThe contrast becomes even clearer when framed through Bloom’s Taxonomy, a well-known educational model that categorises learning into cognitive levels (Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyse, Evaluate, and Create).CLP focuses on the foundational tiers: Remember: memorising case law and statutes; Understand: explaining doctrines and proceduresThe Victorian Bar Readers’ Course engages the upper levels: Apply, Analyse, Evaluate, and Create, through simulations, feedback, and reflective learningBoth systems have value, but the difference lies in where they stop. While the CLP grounds students in legal knowledge, the Victorian model carries them further, into application, synthesis, and judgment.Looking forwardOf course, no single model fits all. But there’s value in exploring how we might complement our current system with more hands-on, practice-oriented elements.Introducing structured opportunities for advocacy, supervised simulations, and formative feedback could bridge the gap between academic knowledge and real-world legal skills.If the aim is to nurture capable, thoughtful, and practice-ready lawyers, then rethinking how we train them is a conversation worth having.(Editor’s note: The Oscar Wilde quotation in full reads: “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness.”) Mable Leong is a former litigation lawyer and an FMT reader.The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.