Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Love and hate relationships

So often when students talk with me about law school, they make emotional statements that have to do with love and hate.  Law school seems to cause people to feel strongly and not sit on the fence about the experience.

The item that most often gets strong positive reactions is "the law" itself.  Students often tell me that they find the field of law fascinating. They are strong proponents of the "rule of law" and their future role in protecting our legal system.  Many of them love the idea of being able to use the law professionally to help others.  However, the commonality of the experience often ends here.

A few students will tell me that they love everything about law school.  They enjoy the challenge of being around very bright classmates every day.  They enjoy reading the cases to learn the law in a number of course areas.  They thrive on the chance to enter Board of Barristers competitions.  They are energized by the questioning in classes.  And, they are grateful for professors who have a real open-door policy.

But many of the students do not love law school as a whole.  They will talk about the things they hate even though they may like some things.  They hate the gossipy, junior-high-school atmosphere where rumors abound.  They hate smug, arrogant classmates who pick on those in the section who are less attractive, less self-assured, and less clued-in.  They hate the overly competitive nature of law students.  

Most law students have a balance between love and hate so that they persevere through the parts they detest and enjoy the parts they like.  What most of them do not understand is that how they act individually can affect how the law school experience is for them AND for their classmates.

What do I mean?  I mean that the negative behaviors of law students can be impacted by their classmates' positive behaviors. 

The rumor-mongerers and gossipers need others to listen and pass on their statements to be successful.  If law students make individual decisions not to participate in the gossip cycle, the cycle will end.  Walk away.  Do not pass on the gossip or rumor.  Better yet, tell the gossiper that s/he should stop passing on the gossip or rumor.

The section bullies need others to keep silent and not stand up for the "underdogs" to get the most mileage.  If law students make individual decisions to speak up against bullying and defend the "underdogs" against the bullies, the bullies can be silenced.  In the worst cases, law students might have to go to the deans for help to get the behavior stopped.  

Law school will mean greater competition realistically because most students are for the first time in an environment where everyone is highly intelligent.  Most law students did not have to study very hard for their As and Bs in high school and college.  They were always the cream of the class.  Thus, some feelings of law school being competitive are probably inevitable for many law students. 

However, law school does not have to develop into an overly competitive and cut-throat environment.  Individual law students can make decisions not to rip pages out of library books, not to steal study aids from ASP library, not to stress out classmates with obscure questions right before the exam, and not to consider their success equivalent to a grade.  When law students keep a balanced perspective on law school by having outside interests, staying in touch with family and friends outside law school, and realizing that grades are not the only measure of a person, they can avoid becoming overly competitive as well as being miserable because of the competition.   

By keeping balance in their lives, law students have a better chance of withstanding the negatives of law school and finding more positives.  By having a positive impact on their law school class, law students can help to minimize some of the hateful aspects of law school.  It takes perseverence, perspective, and sometimes courage.  (Amy Jarmon)


       

June 30, 2009 in Miscellany | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, June 26, 2009

Myths and Misconceptions about Law School and Legal Careers

This post was inspired by some conversations I had with other law professors and administrators at the Institute for Law Teaching and Learning conference at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington.  Many of the things I hear from undergrads interested in law school are the very same things that cause ASP professionals trouble when those undergrads go to law school.  There are many myths and misconceptions about what it takes to go to law school, what type of person you should be to be a successful lawyer, and general misconceptions about a legal career. Although this blog is aimed at ASP professionals, I know students sometimes read the blog as well. Hopefully, a few will read this and think a bit more deeply about law school, or if they are a law student, hopefully this will give them some food for thought about what is required to succeed in law school.

1) I like to argue, so I would be a good lawyer. There are several problems with this belief. The first problem is that lawyers need to skilled at argument, not arguing. Argument is different from arguing. Argument is a well-formed analysis of an issue that addresses, and rebuts, different perspectives on a topic. Having the ability to harangue your parents into allowing you to break curfew is not argument.  Badgering siblings until they break down and cry is not argument.  It may be called arguing, but it is not argument. Llogic is ancillary to arguing. Logic is the cornerstone of a good argument.  While many lawyers argue, it is a not a skill that makes them successful. Frequently, it is what makes lawyers annoying and disliked. The ability to craft arguments for your position make a successful lawyer. If you are struggling with legal writing, it is likely one of the problems is a lack of analysis or argument.  No yelling, badgering, annoying, haranguing, or bullying necessary.

2) I hate math, and law school requires good writing skills, not math skills. I think it was said brilliantly by my colleague at Quinnnipiac Law School, Cindy Slane; "Law is like geometry in words."  Law requires logic, and logic is the cornerstone of (most) math. It is possible to be very logical and hate math, but it's not too common.  If you are not logical, law school is going to be a long, painful slog.  Many of the students I worked with in Acacademic Support find logic to be impenetrable. These are the students who barely squeak by in law school if they make it at all, and leave the law profession. 

3) I have to major in Political Science, History, or English to go to law school. No. Just no. Not true in any way. Many brilliant attorneys have majored in engineering, biology, art, psychology, or chemistry.  The most important thing to remember when choosing an undergraduate major is to choose something you will enjoy and succeed in.  Law school admissions offices do NOT favor Political Science, English, or History majors.  In fact, it will not help you at all the be one of these majors, because the skills you need to succeed in law school differ greatly from the knowledge you attain in these majors.  I suggest a broad group of classes to anyone interested in law school, such as micro and macro economics, philosophy and logic, poetry, and public speaking.  If you are struggling in law school, it is highly unlikely that it is caused by your choice of undergraduate major.

4) I want to go to law school because I am not sure what I want to be, but I want to make a lot of money. Please, please, please see the NALP graph on the income of law school graduates. http://www.nalp.org/apictureworth1000words If you didn't go to a "big 14" law school or graduate at the top 10% of your class at a top 50 school, and will not be making a six-figure income when you graduate from law school.  90% of the people who go to a top 50 law school are not going to be in the top 10% of their class. Many people with majors in high-need areas will make as much money coming out of undergrad as they will when they graduate law school. Most law school grads make in the 35-55K range when they graduate.  I have had to break this reality to many law students during their 1L year.  There are so many wonderful reasons to go to law school, but money is not one of them. 

5) US News ranking is what matters most when choosing a law school. Not true, but the answer is quite nuanced.  In all honesty, and to the chagrin of many law school professors, ranking matters. However, it does not matter in the way most pre-law and law students think it matters. Going to a school ranked 25 versus one ranked 30 (or 5 vs, 10) is not going to make a whit of difference when you are looking for a job.  Students who go to a "big 14" school have the opportunity to make more money when they graduate, and most law school academics come from those schools. But if you want to be a local attorney in a certain state, look for schools that produce a lot of attorneys in that area. There is such a thing as "regional powerhouse" law schools, and it is something that is not measured by US News. You need to find that out yourself by talking to attorneys in the area where you want a job when you graduate. Fit is absolutely critical when choosing a law school. I see many students transferring because they choose the best ranked law school that admitted them, and later found the school did not fit with their career goals or their personality. Law students who are struggling should not assume that the law school is the problem, because the first year curriculum is standard across the country. But if you are struggling because you are homesick, don't like the culture of your law school, or hate the weather in the area, it might be best to transfer to a school that is a better "fit" with who you are.

I invite other ASP professionals to send me myths and misconceptions about law school and legal careers.  This is the time of the year future law students are getting ready to make their final arrangements for law school, and this may help a few make better choices so they do not wind up in our offices later in the year. (RCF--rebecca.flanagan(@)uconn.edu)

June 26, 2009 in Advice | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 22, 2009

Michigan State Law Temp ASP Position

Michigan State University College of Law is looking for an Academic Success
Professional interested in a temporary appointment for the 2009-2010 academic
year while the Law College searches for an ASP Director. Depending on candidate
qualifications, this temporary position could be a Visiting Professorship or
Teaching Fellowship. Please contact Senior Associate Dean Kathy Payne at 517-
432-6926 or payne@law.msu.edu for more information.

Academic Success Professional – One Year Appointment

Michigan State University College of Law invites applications for a one-year
appointment as an Academic Success Professional. Depending on candidate
qualifications, this position could be a Visiting Professorship or a Teaching
Fellowship. Qualifications include a strong law school record and experience
suggesting an ability to help students succeed in law school and the profession.
Prior successful teaching experience is desirable.

The Academic Success Professional will work with students to help build strong
analytical skills and to enhance performance in law school, on the Bar Exam, and
in practice. S/he will also be a resource for faculty seeking to enhance their
teaching effectiveness.

This position is a 12-month, non-tenure track, non-renewable position. During the
2009-2010 academic year, the Law College will conduct a nation-wide search for
an Academic Success Program Director.

Michigan State University College of Law is a leading institution of legal
education with a long history of creating practice-ready attorneys. MSU Law
professors are gifted teachers and distinguished scholars. Law College curriculum
is rigorous and challenging and the facility is equipped with the latest resources-all
affirming MSU Law's commitment to educating 21st century lawyers.

June 22, 2009 in Job Descriptions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Some tips on two commonly used learning styles questionnaires

I have mentioned in a number of postings and presentations that I use the VARK questionnaire for absorption learning styles and the ILS questionnaire for processing and absorption learning styles.  A request came in that I share some tips on ASPers using these two questionnaires with their students.

The VARK questionnaire letters stand for Visual, Aural, Read/Write, and Kinesthetic.  These four dimensions are all absorption style measurements.  Read/Write is the same as Verbal on a number of other instruments.  Aural can be used, with additional discussion with students, as a measure for Oral as well.  Likewise, Kinesthetic can be used to discuss Tactile learning.  Students will be multi-modal (2 or more styles are strong) or single mode (only one style is strong).  The link for the VARK questionnaire is: VARK Questionnaire.   

The Index of Learning Styles (ILS) surveys Visual and Verbal absorption styles and processing styles for Global or Sequential, Intuitive or Sensing, and Active or Reflective.  With ILS, the results are given as oppositional continua showing Mild (1 or 3), Moderate (5 or 7) or Strong (9 or 11) preferences for one of the two styles that are compared.  The link for the ILS questionnaire is: Index of Learning Styles.

Both of these questionnaires have the following common characteristics: 

  • They are free on-line to your students and provide printable results immediately upon submission of the questionnaire answers.
  • They are require a relatively short amount of time for students to take them.  The VARK is 16 questions, and the ILS is 44 questions.  Most students can complete both in 30-45 minutes.
  • ASPers can learn to interpret the results easily.  Some interpretation information is on the website for each instrument.  The results can be easily translated to a law school situation.
  • Both suppliers provide information on their websites on copyright permission for ASPers who wish to use the questionnaires with large groups or for research.

Here are some tips when using the instruments with your students:

  • Some students have trouble answering the questions because they feel that they would respond differently depending on the situation.  I suggest that they answer the questions as they would if they were in an undergraduate academic setting (if first-semester 1Ls) or in a law academic setting (other law students).
  • Make sure that students understand that they need to "layer" ALL of their style preferences together to learn best.  Some students fixate on one style ("I'm a visual learner.") and ignore the other dimensions that they need to use to their advantage.
  • Make sure that students understand that they need to use ALL of the styles even if they are not preferences.  They cannot refuse to read cases because they prefer visual over verbal.  Both reflective and active thinkers have to answer professor questions in class.  The best exam answers or papers will use global, sequential, intutive, and sensing styles even though the writer will only prefer two of those processing styles. 
  • Make sure that students understand that their non-preferences are "shadow" styles; students can strength their non-preferences with conscious effort and practice.
  • Remember that even within a category, a student is unique.  "Visual" learners have common traits but will pick different visual strategies because of their own visual score levels and their own "packages" of absorption/processing styles.
  • If the results for Visual-Verbal (Read/Write) are different for the VARK and ILS, I go with the ILS score.  There are 11 questions on the ILS that look specifically at Visual and Verbal.  VARK is only 16 questions total for all four preferences.
  • Very occasionally a student will tell me after our interpretation discussion that the questionnaire results are all wrong.  However, that happens rarely and is probably indicative of what "setting" the student was considering when the questions were answered.
  • Listen carefully to your students.  They often provide their own insights that help you learn more about the nuances of learning styles.  They also mention strategies that work that you never thought of when considering a style.

If you are new to using these questionnaires and want to discuss interpretation with me after you have read the website information and worked with some students, feel free to get in touch with your questions.  (Amy Jarmon)

June 20, 2009 in Learning Styles | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Are you interested in increasing legal profession diversity or in education law?

There are a number of us in academic success who also participate in our law schools’ pipeline efforts with public education, charter schools, colleges, and/or local bar groups.  Our goal is to interest minority students in K-12 and university to stay in school and continue their education.  Hopefully, a number of the students with whom we work will eventually enroll in law school and increase diversity in the legal profession.

 

The Education Law/Wingspread Conference (hosted by University of Southern Maine) will be held in Portland, Me July 19 – 22.  There is a special Wingspread Consortium track during several days of the conference for those who work with pipeline efforts in law schools.  The conference will also interest those of you with specialties in education law.  You can refer to the conference website at Education Law/Wingspread Conference or contact Sarah Redfield sarah.redfield@gmail.com for more information.

 

I will be at the conference with my pipeline team members from our main TTU campus and a local high school.  We will be presenting at several sessions.  I hope that we will see some of you there.  (Amy Jarmon) 

      

June 18, 2009 in Meetings | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Associate Director Position at Pace

Pace University School of Law seeks applicants for the position of Associate Director of Academic Support Program to begin August 1, 2009. This position presents a wonderful opportunity for someone who wants to become a member of a vibrant law school community with a commitment to Opportunitas. Compensation is commensurate with experience.

Minimum requirements are a J.D.; law firm or similar experience; excellent writing and speaking skills; membership in at least one bar and a genuine desire to work closely with students and faculty. Prior academic support experience, teaching experience (e.g., legal writing, Dean’s Scholars or equivalent), membership on law review or moot court and counseling skills are preferred.

The successful candidate will report to the Director of Academic Support and will assist in designing and implementing all aspects of Pace's well established Academic Support Program including: teaching our second and third year Advanced Analytical Skills courses; first year skills workshops; participation in first and second year orientation programs; providing individual writing assistance and counseling; implementing Bar Exam related efforts; assisting the Director in data collection, reports to faculty and administration and development and implementation of new services to enhance our students’ academic performance. The Associate Director will work very closely with the Director of Academic Support in providing all program services to our students.

To apply for this position, please provide a resume, writing sample, and 3 references to:

Jeffrey Miller, Vice Dean for Academic Affairs

Pace Law School

78 North Broadway

White Plains, NY 10603

jmiller@law.pace.edu



June 16, 2009 in Jobs - Descriptions & Announcements | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 8, 2009

LSAC Academic Assistance Workshop-St. Louis

I  was not able to make all the breakout sessions because I don't have the power to be in multiple places at once, so I am covering just a 1/3 of what was presented. I heard only rave reviews from attendees at all the sessions, so I want to give a shout-out to everyone at the conference.

LSAC-St Louis started with a bang; a video starring Russell McClain of U Maryland Law School about a day in the life of an ASPer. It was hysterical, and very true. It is something I think many of us wish our Dean's would watch.  The de-briefing segment run by Paula Manning was hysterical.  Paula does a wonderful job of keeping us all in line.

Next up was the magnificent Joanne Koren of U Miami on building an academic support team. I think we all watched and wished we had the sort of supportive and giving faculty and administrative team as Joanne. She did leave us with some fantastic techniques for building our "show" at our own school. 

Because I was the presenter, along with Amy Jarmon, of ASP 101 and 202, I was notable to attend the other breakout sessions for the first afternoon. I can chime in by saying that I have previously attended Russell McClain's "Happily Singing the Blues" session, and it is one of the best, most innovative, presentations I have been a part of since I joined ASP. I have heard from fellow ASPer's that the faint of heart and the painfully shy may be a bit reticent at joining into the festivities of this session. To say any more would ruin the surprise (and purpose) of the presentation. 

Chris Hawthorne and Joan Van Tol did an amazing job of being both informative and hysterical explaining the new changes to FERPA and how that might impact our programs. I did not think it was possible to make FERPA amusing, but Chris Hawthorne of Loyola LA managed to do it.  I would suggest anyone that works with student TA's should get a copy of their handouts.

I will summarize Friday and Saturday's presentations tomorrow. 

Due to some technical difficulties, my PowerPoint for ASP 202 did not work as planned at the conference. I will try to attach it to this blog post. Please feel free to use and share the PowerPoint, but remember to give me some credit...I worked hard putting this together, even if you didn't see it at the conference!

Download ASP_202[1]

June 8, 2009 in Meetings | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

LSAC Academic Assistance Workshop-St. Louis

I  was not able to make all the breakout sessions because I don't have the power to be in multiple places at once, so I am covering just a 1/3 of what was presented. I heard only rave reviews from attendees at all the sessions, so I want to give a shout-out to everyone at the conference.

LSAC-St Louis started with a bang; a video starring Russell McClain of U Maryland Law School about a day in the life of an ASPer. It was hysterical, and very true. It is something I think many of us wish our Dean's would watch.  The de-briefing segment run by Paula Manning was hysterical.  Paula does a wonderful job of keeping us all in line.

Next up was the magnificent Joanne Koren of U Miami on building an academic support team. I think we all watched and wished we had the sort of supportive and giving faculty and administrative team as Joanne. She did leave us with some fantastic techniques for building our "show" at our own school. 

Because I was the presenter, along with Amy Jarmon, of ASP 101 and 202, I was notable to attend the other breakout sessions for the first afternoon. I can chime in by saying that I have previously attended Russell McClain's "Happily Singing the Blues" session, and it is one of the best, most innovative, presentations I have been a part of since I joined ASP. I have heard from fellow ASPer's that the faint of heart and the painfully shy may be a bit reticent at joining into the festivities of this session. To say any more would ruin the surprise (and purpose) of the presentation. 

Chris Hawthorne and Joan Van Tol did an amazing job of being both informative and hysterical explaining the new changes to FERPA and how that might impact our programs. I did not think it was possible to make FERPA amusing, but Chris Hawthorne of Loyola LA managed to do it.  I would suggest anyone that works with student TA's should get a copy of their handouts.

I will summarize Friday and Saturday's presentations tomorrow. 

Due to some technical difficulties, my PowerPoint for ASP 202 did not work as planned at the conference. I will try to attach it to this blog post. Please feel free to use and share the PowerPoint, but remember to give me some credit...I worked hard putting this together, even if you didn't see it at the conference!

Download ASP_202[1]

June 8, 2009 in Meetings | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

See you at LSAC St. Louis

Rebecca and I will be going to St. Louis for the LSAC Academic Assistance Training Workshop.  I hope that we will see many of you there. 

We are looking forward to seeing colleagues that we have known for years.  And, we look forward to meeting those of you who are new to ASP or whom we have not had the opportunity to get to know previously. 

Rebecca and I will be co-presenting the ASP 101 and ASP 202 sessions on Thursday.  We would love to have you drop by the sessions.  There are so many good presentations scheduled that it will be hard to choose among the concurrent sessions!

Have safe travels to St. Louis.  (Amy Jarmon) 

June 2, 2009 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Article on Learning Disabilities: Dyslexia and Time

For those of you interested in articles dealing with learning disabilities, you will want to read the article by Suzanne Rowe in the most recent volume of the Journal for the Legal Writing Institute Volume 15, Issue 1.  The article is entitled Learning Disabilities and the Americans with Disabilities Act: The Conundrum of Dyslexia and Time.  Suzanne is an Associate Professor and Director of Legal Research and Writing at Unviersity of Oregon School of Law.    Thank you to the Legal Writing Prof Blog for the link.  (Amy Jarmon) 

June 2, 2009 in Books, Disability Matters | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 1, 2009

Distinguishing Learning Preferences, Cognitive Processing Styles, and Multiple Intelligences

My post will serve two purposes; first, hopefully I will clear up some confusion about the differences between these three concepts; second, I want to plug the LSAC conference next week, and mention that Amy (Jarmon) will be discussing learning preferences and cognitive processing styles during the session titled "ASP 202."

There is a flurry of talk about learning preferences, cognitive processing styles, and multiple intelligences. That is a great thing; as ASPer's, we are often the first to suggest ways to improve law school teaching, and knowing how people learn best is incredibly important when brainstorming ways to help students learn.  However, many people use these terms interchangeably, when they are very different concepts that have very different applicability in the law school setting. I am not an expert on the first two (learning preferences and cognitive processing styles)--Amy wears that crown, and I strongly suggest everyone go back to her columns on 10/8/2008, 10/9/2008, 10/13/2008, 3/17/2008, and 2/9/2007 as a refresher. I wrote (and defended) my master's thesis on Howard Gardner's work with Project Zero and multiple intelligences, so this is an area I feel very comfortable discussing with anyone who has questions.

Learning preferences (or learning styles)refer to someones preferred method of absorbing information; visual, auditory/aural, read/write, and kinesthetic/tactile.  Someone who is primarily a visual learner prefers to absorb information through charts, mind maps, and diagrams.  An auditory or aural learner prefers to learn information by listening to it. Aural learners like the Law School Legends Series of CD's, like to record classes, and should read their notes aloud as they transform them for outlines.  Read/write learners prefer to absorb information by reading and writing; law school is made for them.  Kinesthetic/tactile learners like to touch, feel, and move with the information. They learn best by doing; dividing their notes into columns by topic and flash cards work well for them. Few people fall into one category exclusively; most of us are multi-modal learners.  Our learning preferences can change over time. An excellent resource on learning preferences is at www.vark-learn.com; check it out of you have not had a chance.

I will only go into cognitive processing styles briefly. Amy is the guru, and her posts on 10/8, 10/9, and 10/13/2008 do a far, far better job than I can explaining the different processing styles. I am using Amy's descriptions for this post. There are four processing styles; global, sequential, intuitive, and sensing. Global learners prefer to see the big picture, sequential learners prefer to look at each unit first and only seek the bigger picture after they are comfortable with the parts, intuitive learners prefer ideas, policies, theories, abstractions, and the inter-relationships among these concepts, and sensing learners prefer facts, details, and practicalities.  These processing styles work together. You will frequently encounter global-intuitive learners and sequential-sensing learners. These also work together with learning preferences; any type of cognitive processing style will have learning preferences as well. An example: a global learner, who prefers to process information "top-down" can also be a visual learner who likes to create flow charts that start with the big picture and later connect the smaller pieces.  Learning preferences and cognitive processing styles are not the same, but complimentary preferences. A learning preference is a preferred way of delivery of information, while processing style is the way the information is organized and understood by your mind AFTER delivery. 

Multiple intelligences refers to the limitations of measuring intelligence solely from the Stanford-Binet intelligence-quotient model.  Currently, there are eight intelligences, as defined by Howard Gardner, the "father" of the multiple intelligences movement; linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and (the newest) naturalistic.  Linguistic and logical-mathematical refer to the types of intelligences tested on the Stanford-Binet IQ test most people associate with "intelligence" in the western world. These are also the intelligences valued in law school.  Howard Gardner, an educator working with the Project Zero research project at Harvard, posited in 1983 that the traditional method of measuring intelligence left out large segments of the population, such as people with a gift for music, or people who are skilled at interacting with others or possess that undefinable "charisma" that draws people to them.  Interior designers must possess spatial intelligence to arrange furniture to highlight the benefits of a space. 

To excel in law school, law students must have highly developed linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. However, as a lawyer, they must posses both interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. Law school is frequently criticized for valuing linguistic and logical mathematical intelligence while neglecting the interpersonal intelligence necessary to deal with clients and associates.  The high levels of depression and substance abuse plaguing the profession may be a symptom of the lack of intrapersonal intelligence among lawyers.

But here is one of the areas where ASPer's can get confused; bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is NOT the same as kinesthetic/tactile learning preferences, auditory/aural learning preferences are NOT the same as musical intelligence, and spacial intelligence is NOT the same as a visual learning preference.  A person will highly developed bodily-kinesthetic intelligence will be an excellent dancer, excel at sports, and greet people with hugs. They may, or may not, prefer to learn new information by touching or moving. Many dancers, as well as athletes, prefer visual representations to learn new moves or plays. Similarly, someone with highly developed musical intelligence is likely to prefer to learn things by hearing them, but many composers actually prefer visual methods of absorbing information.  Many people with highly developed spacial intelligence are multi-modal, and need to move (kinesthetic/tactile) pieces in order to visualize the end result; architects draw blueprints and create models.  In summary, no matter what your intelligence, you can have ANY learning preference or cognitive processing style. In law schools, multiple intelligences have limited applicability on a small-scale, one-on-one level, but have great applicability when designing new courses and curriculum that reflects changes in the profession.  Learning styles and multiple intelligences are not interchangable terms. They are very different concepts that address completely different things; learning is not an intelligence.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at the blog, or talk to us after "ASP 202" next Thursday in St. Louis! (RCF)

June 1, 2009 in Learning Styles | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)