Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
The rankings are based on the methodology used by the Blakely Advocacy Institute at U. Houston School of Law which rates each law school based on its combined score for all ABA approved moot court competitions. The BAI then invites the top 16 schools in the nation to the Andrew Kurth Moot Court Competition in January to decide "the best of the best." Using the BAI's criteria, National Jurist Magzine ranked law school moot court programs as follows:
- Florida Coastal
- South Texas College of Law
- Texas Tech
- U. Georgia
- Seton Hall
- U. Miami
See the schools ranked 11- 20 here.
The University of Baltimore Law School and Hofstra Law School are offering law courses in sunny Curacao:
Consider a program in an exotic destination like Curaçao, which is jointly offered by the University of Baltimore School of Law and Hofstra University, Maurice A. Deane School of Law.
“In addition to spending Christmas on a Caribbean beach, the highlights of the program were the multiple field trips to various national and local government offices to experience firsthand comparative and international law,” said Clark Smith, a third-year law student at the University of Baltimore. “We visited the local prosecutor’s office to discuss Curaçao’s legal system based on Dutch law and to the U.S. Consulate to learn about cooperation on drug interdiction between the U.S. and Curaçao.”
Catherine Moore, Coordinator for International Programs at the University of Baltimore, said students often bring their families to accompany them on the three-week trip to Curaçao, which overlaps with the holiday season.
You can read more here. As law schools seek new ways to attract students and make money, I am sure we will see more winter break courses.
Recently, Avvo, a website that rates professionals, created a profile and rated me. (Of course, anyone who picks a lawyer based on a website like this deserves what he or she gets.) Because I don't practice law, I asked Avvo to remove my profile. Here is its response.(The inability to spell my name correctly does not give confidence is the quality of the operation) Any suggestions?
Wired recently published an article on active learning. (here) Some excerpts:
"Think back to when you learned how to ride a bike. You probably didn’t master this skill by listening to a series of riveting lectures on bike riding. Instead, you tried it out for yourself, made mistakes, fell down a few times, picked yourself back up, and tried again. When mastering an activity, there’s no substitute for the interaction and feedback that comes from practice."
"A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences addressed this question by conducting the largest and most comprehensive review of the effect of active learning on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education. Their answer is a resounding yes. According to Scott Freeman, one of the authors of the new study, 'The impact of these data should be like the Surgeon General’s report on “Smoking and Health” in 1964–they should put to rest any debate about whether active learning is more effective than lecturing.'”
"1. Students in a traditional lecture course are 1.5 times more likely to fail, compared to students in courses with active learning." "The authors point out that, were this a medical study, an effect size this large and statistically significant would warrant stopping the study and administering the treatment to everyone in the study."
"2. Students in active learning classes outperform those in traditional lectures on identical exams" "On average, students taught with active learning outperformed those taught by lectures by 6 percentage points on their exam. That’s the difference between bumping a B- to a B or a B to a B+."
Conclusion: "“[Under active learning,] students learn more, which means we’re doing our job better. They get higher grades and fail less, meaning that they are more likely to stay in STEM majors, which should help solve a major national problem. Finally, there is a strong ethical component. There is a growing body of evidence showing that active learning differentially benefits students of color and/or students from disadvantaged backgrounds and/or women in male-dominated fields. It’s not a stretch to claim that lecturing actively discriminates against underrepresented students.”
At this point I usually add some comments. However, this article says it all.
(Scott Fruehwald) (emphasis in original)
Monday, November 24, 2014
Professor Daniel Willingham, a cognitive psychologist at UVA and author of Why Students Don't Like School (hint - it's because learning is hard), has written before about the lack of empirical data supporting the theory of learning styles (including in the aforementioned book). Here is another short article he wrote for the TES blog which bills itself as the world's largest online community for teachers. The article is called Classroom Practice – Listen Closely, Learning Styles are a Lost Cause can be found here. Learning styles are controversial and provoke strong feelings among many teachers insofar as some are convinced of their existence no matter what people like Professor Willingham claim while others remain skeptical in light of the studies that have failed to prove that, for example, students who identify as visual learners score better on tests when the teacher uses visual techniques than if the same material is taught using a different modality like aural, kinesthetic, etc. This most recent article likely won't change many minds but is still worth a glance if you're interested in the topic. Here's an excerpt:
. . . .
In many schools – indeed, in some teacher training institutions – learning styles are treated as proven fact. And although some teachers have accepted that this faith is misguided, others fight the truth and vigorously defend the theory. A common argument is that their teaching has always been informed by learning styles and their experience bears out the theory’s utility. The science, they say, must be wrong. I can assure you, it is not.
Most studies on the theory tend to test it as follows:
- Step 1 – determine the “learning style” of, say, 100 people.
- Step 2 – offer an experience that is consistent with the style of half the group and inconsistent with the style of the other half. For example, if you have 50 people with a “visual style”, show 25 of them a silent film that depicts a story and make the other 25 listen to an audio version of the story. Then do the same for the 50 people with an auditory style: half experience the story in their preferred style (by listening) and half in their non-preferred style (by watching).
- Step 3 – measure people’s comprehension of the story or their memory of it some time later.
If learning styles existed, the people who had experienced the story in their preferred style would get more out of it. Unfortunately, all the studies show that this core prediction simply does not hold; not for children with typical development and not for children who have learning difficulties.
. . . .
Continue reading here.
According to Harrison Barnes at LawCrossing, here are 12 sins you should NOT commit on a resume:
1. Emphasizing responsibilities but not accomplishments -- or, conversely, getting bogged down in minutiae.
2. Telling (instead of showing) the reader how wonderful you are.
3. Allowing chronology to determine structure.
4. Using a "one size fits all" approach.
5. Wasting critical space under your name with a prominent display of your address and phone number.
6. Making margins so wide that the text is forced into narrow columns.
7. Including your photograph.
8. Using small print.
9. Using a scripted font.
10. Using bold typeface for standard categories.
11. Having your legal resume professionally printed.
12. Failing to take into account how the means of transmittal will alter the appearance.
You can find full explanations here.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
The publication of a new paper by Richard Sander, Mismatch and the Empirical Scholars Brief, has reopened the controversy concerning affirmative action in law schools and his "mismatch hypothesis." (here) The mismatch hypothesis "postulate[s] that very large preferences--racial or of any other kind--may undermine student learning, because professors tend to teach to the middle of their class, and students far below the middle will have trouble keeping up and advancing as concepts build day by day."
There has been a great deal of criticism of Sander's hypothesis. However, I would like to approach it from a different angle: regardless of whether Sander is correct, can law schools overcome the seeming disadvantages that students admitted through affirmative action display by adopting new teaching techniques? I believe that the answer to this question is yes.
There has a great deal of criticism of law schools' approach to legal education, particularly the Socratic method, the case book approach, and the paucity of practical experiences. While many disagree, I find these criticisms devastating. Law schools are using a nineteenth-century approach to solve a twenty-first-century problem. Even the philosophical basis of the Langdellian method has been thoroughly refuted. (here)
A recent study has demonstrated that smaller classes, personal attention, active learning, and frequent formative assessment can eliminate the gender gap in g.p.a. for law school graduates. While I know of no similar study in the law concerning minorities, studies in other fields show that new approaches to teaching, particularly the use of active learning and developing a growth mindset, help at risk students perform better. (e.g., Daniel T. Willingham, Why Students Don't Like School Ch. 8 (2009), here, here, here, here, here) For example, a "recent study, focusing on different sections of an introductory biology class at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, found that active learning is particularly beneficial to African-American students and first-generation college students. All students' test scores combined rose more than three points in classes structured around active learning, but African-American and first-generation students in active-learning classes saw scores rise more than six points." (here)
If law schools are going to admit students through affirmative action programs, they have the responsibility to make sure that those students succeed. They should not be thrown into the pool to sink or swim. As the old saying goes "give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." Affirmative action programs without more effective approaches to teaching are liking giving a man a fish. Law schools need to teach men and women to fish so that they can succeed as lawyers.
It is called, appropriately enough, The Practice, and is intended to bring together under one roof academic research and practical advice for legal practitioners including everyone from newly minted lawyers to BigLaw partners. The magazine will offer thoughtful analysis and perspectives on the legal profession for a global audience based on Center on the Legal Profession’s groundbreaking empirical research. More specifically, the magazine will address the following subject matter and topics:
- Research: What does academic research reveals about the best ways to practice law today? Get original research from the Center on the Legal Profession, plus reports from the journals tailored to your practice.
- Commentary: What are leading legal academics and professionals saying about the changing legal profession? In each issue, receive insights from the top legal practitioners and thinkers in the world.
- Perspective: What major trends will be affecting your firm over the next year, five years, or 10 years? How are legal services evolving as a profession—and as a business?
- Analysis: How do U.S. and worldwide trends in the legal industry affect you, whether you’re a newly minted associate or a partner looking to ensure a legacy? What can you expect from changing global regulation in coming years?
- Practice: How can law practices and professionals navigate change and elevate their practice? Each issue offers benefits like tips from top practitioners and “The Takeaway”—the bottom line on what the broad trends analyzed in each issue mean for your practice and clients.
This looks like it's going to be an especially helpful publication for those teaching legal skills to keep up with the times and latest practice trends. The inaugural issue is available for free here. Thereafter individual subscriptions to the bimonthly magazine will be $195 per year (institutional subscriptions will also be available).
Hat tip to Robert Ambrogi's always excellent and informative LawSites blog.
From the Columbus Dispatch:
Five more universities around Ohio are receiving bomb-sniffing dogs as officials expand a state program that makes more of those canines available for safety needs on and off campuses.
The University of Toledo, Kent State University, Ohio University and Central State University are each getting a dog trained to detect explosives. Rex, the German Shepherd going to Cleveland State University, will receive extra training to be part of general patrol operations, according to Ohio Homeland Security.
You can read more here And at my school, we can’t get permission to bring in well-trained dogs to comfort the students during exam time.
From msn news:
Oxford Dictionaries picked "vape" - the act of smoking an e-cigarette - as their new word of the year on Tuesday, with the affectionate "bae" and the more pragmatic "contactless" as runners-up.
"Vaping has gone mainstream," with usage doubling in 2014 compared to 2013, editorial director Judy Pearsall said.
"The language usage of the word vape and related terms in 2014 has shown a marked increase" due to celebrities "vaping" and "growing public debate on the public dangers and the need for regulation", she said.
The word, which was first used in the 1980s, can be employed as a verb to mean inhaling and exhaling the vapour produced by electronic cigarettes but also as a noun to refer to the devices themselves.
You can read more here. Oh, am I out of touch. I have never heard of “vape” or “bae” until now.
Barbara Glesner Fines has written an excellent article on using learning outcomes in professional responsibility class.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
The ABA Journal Blog has the story here. What it boils down to is that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has changed the way it calculates projected job openings in the legal services sector. Until now, the BLS based its job projections on the assumption that those who enter the legal profession stay until they get old or retire. In reality, many lawyers - I recall reading a story several years ago that put the figure at 50% within 10 years - leave the profession much earlier than that to pursue alternative careers. As a result, the BLS may have been greatly understating the number of new jobs openings in the legal services sector. From now on, the BLS will measure measure attrition through survey results rather than relying on assumptions about cradle to grave career paths.
As we have reported, scores on the Multistate Bar Exam have declined, and that decline has raised a minor ruckus. Over at Best Practices for Legal Education (Nov. 14), Margaret Moore Johnson raises a difficult issue: would traditional doctrinal teaching help our students pass the bar more than does the sort of teaching that many of us now advocate? (my words, not hers):
But at a time when law schools are focusing on teaching integrated doctrine, skills, and values, an already ambitious undertaking, is it backtracking to reconsider the multiple choice test – like LSAT prep all over again – instead of progressively developing knowledge and true professional competence? Or is it appropriate to simultaneously develop the skills students need to pass the (often criticized) bar exam?
November 23 is Harpo Marx’s Birthday. In honor of the late comedian, here are his Family Rules:
|Harpo Marx Family Rules|
|1 Life has been created for you to enjoy, but you won't enjoy it unless you pay for it with some good, hard work. This is one price that will never be marked down.|
|2 You can work at whatever you want to as long as you do it as well as you can and clean up afterwards and you're at the table at mealtime and in bed at bedtime.|
|3 Respect what the others do. Respect Dad's harp, Mom's paints, Billy's piano, Alex's set of tools, Jimmy's designs, and Minnie's menagerie.|
|4 If anything makes you sore, come out with it. Maybe the rest of us are itching for a fight, too.|
|5 If anything strikes you as funny, out with that, too. Let's all the rest of us have a laugh.|
|6 If you have an impulse to do something that you're not sure is right, go ahead and do it. Take a chance. Chances are, if you don't you'll regret it - unless you break the rules about mealtime and bedtime, in which case you'll sure as hell regret it.|
|7 If it's a question of whether to do what's fun or what is supposed to be good for you, and nobody is hurt whichever you do, always do what's fun.|
|8 If things get too much for you and you feel the whole world's against you, go stand on your head. If you can think of anything crazier to do, do it.|
|9 Don't worry about what other people think. The only person in the world important enough to conform to is yourself.|
|10 Anybody who mistreats a pet or breaks a pool cue is docked a months pay.|
Friday, November 21, 2014
Everyone agrees that job prospects for many new law graduates have been poor for the last several years; there is rather less consensus on whether, when, how, or why that may change as the economy recovers from the Great Recession. This Article analyzes historical and current trends in the job market for new lawyers in an effort to predict how that market may evolve.
The Article derives quantitative measurements of the proportion of law graduates over the last thirty years who have obtained initial employment for which law school serves as rational substantive preparation (“Law Jobs”). In comparing entry-level hiring patterns since 2008 with those in earlier periods, a significant development emerges: While other sectors of the market for new lawyers have changed only modestly during the Great Recession, one sector — the larger private law firms colloquially known as “BigLaw” — has contracted proportionally six times as much as all the others. Entering BigLaw classes overall are now roughly one-third smaller than they were seven years ago. And though BigLaw hiring has historically accounted for only 10% to 20% of each graduating class, it is responsible for over half the entry-level Law Jobs lost since 2008.
While some observers predict a return to business as usual as the economy recovers, this Article is skeptical of that account. The Article identifies significant structural changes in the way that the services BigLaw has traditionally provided are being produced, staffed, and priced that diminish BigLaw’s need for junior lawyers, both immediately and in the longer term. These observations suggest that entry-level BigLaw hiring, and thus the market for new lawyers overall, will remain depressed below pre-recession levels well after demand improves to or beyond pre-recession levels. At the same time, even though entry-level demand may remain static, new lawyers’ job prospects may nevertheless improve as the con-traction in the legal academy now underway reduces the number of new graduates competing for work.
Here is the opening paragraph from Apple’s brief in its patent suit against Samsung:
Samsung is before the court and on trial, because Apple alleges that Samsung copied Apple’s iPhone and iPad. This conduct was the result of a deliberate decision on the part of Samsung. In its history, Apple has created innovations in product design and user interface technology, which resulted in strong and solid intellectual property rights. With respect to those property rights, Samsung has infringed on them. Try as it might, Samsung cannot deflect the attention it has received from its conduct in copying the patents that it has asserted that it claims that Apple has taken from it.
Here is my rewrite:
Samsung deliberately copied Apple’s iPhone and iPad. It infringed on Apple’s intellectual property rights, that is, its innovative product design and user interface technology. Sumsung unsuccessfully attempts to deflect attention from its copying by alleging patent infringement by Apple. However, as this trial will disclose, Samsung slipped its patents into the UMTS wireless standards. It deceived the international body responsible for creating these standards and thus illegally monopolized technology markets.
Although my version contains only a few less words than Apple’s, it seems more concise and to the point. It is direct. The focus is on Samsung; Samsung is the subject of every sentence. As a result, the paragraph has direction and tells a story supporting Apple’s case.
On November 22, we observe the assassination of President Kennedy. Many of us remember how painful a time that was.
Here is a 10 minute video excerpted from the final presidential debate between then-Senator Kennedy and Richard Nixon. The quality of the debate reminds us how political debates once had substance and spoke well of the participants.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
We have argued several times on this blog that the bar exam needs to be revised to better test what lawyers will do in practice. Here is an article by Ben Bratman on how to imrove the bar exam.
The path to meaningful bar exam reform does not run through the MBE or the essay examination; it runs through the performance test. The Multistate Performance Test (MPT) or a comparable state-produced version appears on the bar exam in nearly 80 percent of U.S. jurisdictions. It evaluates real-world lawyering skills that simply cannot be tested to anywhere near the same extent, if at all, by the MBE or essay examination, each of which requires knowledge of extensive doctrinal content.
Designed to evaluate several of the fundamental lawyering skills identified in the ground breaking MacCrate Report, the performance test had great potential. But in significant ways it has not yet fulfilled that potential. A review of MPT questions administered to date reveals a narrow and stagnant testing vehicle that is not adequately evaluating the range of competencies central to the work of today’s newly licensed lawyer. The MPT has even failed to test on some of the skill sets listed within its published scope of coverage. Moreover, the performance test still remains the smallest part of the bar exam, relegated to third fiddle behind the MBE and essay examination.
Especially in light of empirical evidence that competent performance of many specific lawyering skills is more important to the work of beginning lawyers than knowledge of law, bar examiners should reinvigorate the performance test. Improved and expanded performance test questions could more thoroughly evaluate a wider array of the skills that bar applicants need upon entry to the profession. In addition, more performance test questions could be administered on each bar exam, and, notwithstanding psychometric limitations, examiners could increase the test’s scoring weight relative to that of the other exam components. It is through these reforms that the bar exam can become an instrument that truly evaluates competency to practice law more than knowledge of law.
The deadline is December 20. Here are the details:
Seeking a Graduate Teaching Fellow for the Georgetown Law School Community Justice Project
Please submit your C.V. and a letter of interest to Professor Jane H. Aiken at firstname.lastname@example.org. All applications should be received by December 20 2014. Those selected to interview will be interviewed during early January with selection following shortly. Start date is July 1, 2015 and the fellowship is for two years, ending June 30, 2017.
Description of the Clinic
The Community Justice Project opened in the Fall of 2010. The Clinic provides students with training and practice in many lawyering skills and stimulates students to think broadly about the myriad ways to effect change within the legal system. The Community Justice Project cuts across many subject matter areas. Students in this clinic use multiple tactics to achieve client objectives, including advocacy, public relations, the use of media, lobbying, legislative and policy drafting and community organizing.
The clinic embraces a focused and explicit use of clinical education to enhance the students' commitment to social justice. In short, in addition to specific traditional legal skills, The Community Justice Project teaches students about the commitment that will sustain and energize people over the long haul, the tactics that can produce success in particular cases, and the sense of strategy that looks to long-term (perhaps very long-term) success, and participation in a protracted struggle for justice.
Students represent individual clients in Unemployment Insurance Appeal cases, starting with an initial interview and ending with an administrative hearing two weeks later. In addition to their direct representation cases, students are also assigned to a Project Team for the semester. The Projects vary in their substance, size of Project Team, type of client, type of responsibilities, and timelines. Through these projects, students are able to engage in a breadth of lawyering and creative advocacy skills. These Projects provide a platform for students to think strategically about the project of justice and redefine what "winning" means. Our students have done work in the community to provide justice in many areas. For more detail on specific projects, please visit our website at https://www.law.georgetown.edu/academics/academic-programs/clinical-programs/our-clinics/Community-Justice/cjp-projects.cfm.
Description of the Fellowship
The Community Justice Project hires one individual to serve as a clinical teaching fellow and supervising attorney each year, for a two year term. Fellows have several areas of responsibility, with an increasing role as the fellowship progresses. First, fellows supervise students in direct representation cases, as co-supervisors with experienced fellows and faculty and then on their own. Second, fellows co-supervise one or more Project Teams of students. Third, the fellows and faculty share responsibility for teaching seminar sessions. Fourth, fellows share in the administrative and case handling responsibilities of the clinic. Finally, fellows participate in a clinical pedagogy seminar and other activities designed to support an interest in clinical teaching and legal education.
We will only consider applicants with at least 3 years of post J.D. legal experience. Applicants must be admitted or willing to be admitted to the District of Columbia Bar. We are most interested in applicants with experience in direct representation, commitment to social justice, and an interest in clinical teaching and legal education.
Send application by e-mail to:
The Community Justice Project