Thursday, February 2, 2012
This semester, I have the privilege of co-teaching an introduction to law course with a professor from the Storrs campus. Co-teaching a class has been a wonderful learning experience for me. While the idea was two teachers could split the workload, I am finding that I spend more time preparing for each class than if I taught it on my own. Here are some of the unexpected benefits from co-teaching a class:
1) You bring your A game to every class.
I have tremendous respect for my co-teacher; he is a master teacher with far more experience than me. While I always give 100% to my teaching, co-teaching with a master teacher forces me to think and rethink every choice I make.
2) You think about how you would explain the lesson to another expert.
Thinking about how you would explain your lesson plan to a colleague forces you to think about your lesson in a different way. We all consider how our students are going to absorb the material when we lesson plan, but thinking about the questions an expert might ask forces me to think more deeply about how my lesson works.
3) Feedback helps you see weaknesses your students might not point out.
I don't mean constructive criticism. Feedback--the back and forth about teaching--forces you to deal with what you don't know. So far this semester, I have learned that I need to learn how to use HuskyCT (a classroom web platform) and that I am behind the curve on learning technologies in general. This is a benefit that comes from teaching with a non-law school professor; other disciplines have embraced technology in a way that law has not.
4) You have to grapple with equally valid, but different, perspectives on a topic.
My co-teacher and I have very different backgrounds, and different perspectives. He was a big-firm lawyer before going back for his PhD; my experience with the law is in public interest and education. We have different perspectives on the challenges in the field. When I plan a lesson, I have to think about how it applies to big firm and corporate law.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
This is a blog post I share with my students on the Monday before the bar exam, when they need that final push to go forth and conquer. I write with the California Bar Exam in mind, but the general ideas can transfer to other jurisdictions.
Tant que je respire, j’attaque!
It’s finally here! Hopefully you set a time today to stop studying so that you can relax and attack the exam with a fresh mind tomorrow morning. Trust me, you’ve been studying for months and a few hours will not make much, if any, difference. As you start to wrap things up, here are a few last-minute reminders:
Mind the clock!
It’s the cardinal rule of bar prep: Do not exceed 60 minutes on any California Bar essay question! No matter how difficult a particular question may be, no good can come from spending more time on one answer at the expense of others. A graduate once admitted to spending extra time on a question that was complex and contained a lot of issues. He received an 85% on his answer – a terrific score – but it was not enough to compensate for the scores he received on the other essays that he had to rush through.
You have no greater friend on the California Bar Exam (aside from your watch) than IRAC. Even if you encounter a “throat-clearer” issue, you can still use IRAC and make your grader happy. For example:
A witness may not testify to a matter unless the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Here, Wit saw the accident occur, so Wit has personal knowledge.
That is a very short analysis, but it still follows the IRAC format. IRAC keeps your answer organized and is what your graders want and expect to see, so don’t deviate.
Zip your lips!
No matter how tempted you are to rush out of the testing center at lunch and double-check every detail of your answers with your friends before you forget, resist! Graders look at your answer holistically, so why bother comparing your thoughts with someone else? There is a Contracts question on file where the two released answers each decide differently on the UCC/Common Law issue. Can you imagine if those two applicants had discussed their answers with each other after the exam? Each would have spent the next four months fretting about failure, when in reality they wrote the two published answers.
This one is difficult, but important: If you encounter a question on which you draw the dreaded blank, do not panic. All panicking does is waste time. Instead, there are a couple of proactive measures you can take:
What would my mom say?
When I took the bar, the second essay question covered a topic our commercial review professors promised would hardly be anywhere in the MBE, let alone in the essays – yet there it was. Instead of freaking out and thinking about how certain I was that I would fail (okay, maybe I did that for a minute), I thought about the question from a lay perspective: what would my mom, who never went to college, say if I asked her this question? Remember, the examiners are not trying to trick you. If you think about it logically, you probably will kick-start your brain and be able to pick out the issues and even remember some (or all) of the rules.
If you can’t remember a rule, read through the facts again with a critical eye. Why was Fact A included? Why was Fact B included? The examiners tailor their questions so that almost every fact can be used in an applicant’s answer. By reading through the facts and hunting for clues, you can probably “reverse engineer” the rule by picking out the facts that illustrate the elements.
Finally, and most importantly: NEVER, EVER GIVE UP!!
I was reasonably sure that I failed that second question; in fact I’m still not convinced that I got a passing score on it. Unfortunately I also encountered a couple of other questions (not just one) concerning subjects that I did not expect to see at my sitting. On top of all of that, I felt completely confident about five MBE questions – literally, five out of two hundred! But none of this matters because I stayed calm, answered to the best of my ability, and passed the exam as a whole.
So you encounter a curve ball, and you swing and miss. So what? That’s only one strike. If you throw down your bat and walk away, you might miss out on hitting the game-winning home run! Cheesy analogies aside, you simply have to stay positive and keep attacking each question with confidence, even if you have to fake it.
The title of this entry is a quote from Bernard Hinault, who won the Tour de France five times in the 1980s. Translated to English, it means, “As long as I breathe, I attack.” Take that attitude with you into the bar exam for the next three days, and no matter what they throw at you, don’t let it phase you. As long as you breathe, you attack!
I will be thinking of and rooting for every one of you this week!!