Tuesday, November 10, 2015
If you have not discovered the series that is currently running on C-SPAN about historic U.S. Supreme Court decisions, you will want to check it out. The show is on Monday nights at 9:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The series continues through December 21st. For programs that you have missed, you can go to Landmark Cases.
Each program combines background information on the case, the important points from the case, information on the attorneys and the justices, and video clips of interviews or location tours. Two experts (usually one law professor and one historian) join the moderator each week and a few questions from callers/social media are interspersed with the prepared portions of the program. There is a companion book for purchase.
If you have an ABA Journal for October or November lying around, it will have a full-page ad for the series near the front. Cases that have been discussed already are: Marbury v. Madison; Scott v. Sandford; the Slaughterhouse Cases; Lochner v. New York; Schenck v. United States; Korematsu v. United States. Upcoming cases are: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer; Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka; Mapp v. Ohio; Baker v. Carr; Miranda v. Arizona; Roe v. Wade.
Whether you are a law student or a lawyer interested in Constitutional Law, this series will increase your understanding of these important decisions. (Amy Jarmon)
Thursday, August 13, 2015
In case you missed it, the August 2015 issue of the ABA Journal takes a look at legal movies in its article, "100 Years of Law at the Movies." So dig out the buried copy from your inbox and grab the popcorn. The list reminded me of some classics I want to see again and a few that I never made it to the cinema to view. (Amy Jarmon)
Monday, August 10, 2015
I recently attended the last of the summer films offered by our Teaching Learning and Professional Development Center here on campus. The film showing was an edited version (1 hour) of Waiting for Superman, a 2010 documentary by Davis Guggenheim which looked at the crisis in K-12 public education.
There has been much said and written about the film - both positive and negative. Some sample links are:
Whatever the position you take on the film's accuracy or finger-pointing or pro-charter-school stance, it still brings home the depressing state of American public education. The edited film clearly showed the sad reality of the students who are lost in the system and never finish high school. It also pointed to the number of college students who are under-prepared and have to be remediated. (Many of those in the room who had previously seen the full, unedited version of the film relayed that they were in tears by the end of that screening.)
What hit home for me once again was the impact that the public education crisis ultimately has on preparation for law school. And also once again the impact that the crisis has on the lack of diversity in the legal profession because of the many leaks in the K-12 pipeline, not even mentioning the leaks in the college pipeline. (Amy Jarmon)
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
I have watched this classic law school film multiple times over the years and vividly remember seeing it in the cinema when it first came out (long before I ever ventured across a law school threshold as a 1L student). Recently I decided to watch it once more because it had been several years since my last viewing.
The film has always seemed to me to be the perfect commentary on how not to have a study group. I was reminded of those points once again. Here are some of the things we learn from the movie:
- A study group needs to have members with the same goals and purposes to avoid logistical and group dynamic problems.
- A study group needs to have some ground rules so that each member knows the responsibilities and etiquette of the group.
- A study group will falter if each person is assigned one course to specialize in because only that one person learns the course well and the others suffer if the expert drops out of the group.
- A study group will have conflict if its members become overly competitive, are argumentative, refuse to negotiate on tasks, or hold others hostage by refusing to share information.
- A study group does not belong to the person who invites others to join; it belongs to everyone and should be cooperative.
- A study group will be disrupted by members who become overwhelmed and are unable to pull their weight in the group.
- If one does not study outlines all semester long and distribute learning the material, it may require holing up for days with no sleep at the end in order to cram.
- Learning styles within a group vary; one person will consider an 800-page outline a treasure while the others will view it as a curse.
- Always have a back up copy of your outline in case your computer crashes (or your outline is accidentally tossed out a window).
My wish for all law students would be to have supportive, cooperative, hard-working study groups without drama and negativity. (Amy Jarmon)