Law School Academic Support Blog

Emotional Granularity and the Power of Naming

I believe in the power of words. As the journalist and economist Henry Hazlitt wrote, "The richer and more copious one's vocabulary and the greater one's awareness of fine distinctions and subtle nuances of meaning, the more fertile and precise is likely to be one's thinking. Knowledge of things and knowledge of the words for them grow together." If we didn't already recognize this truth before law school, certainly our legal education inculcated this understanding of the immense power of language.

The power of naming applies not only to factual and intellectual concepts but also to management of our emotions. "[T]he greater one's awareness of fine distinctions and subtle nuances of meaning" of our emotions, the more capable we are of coping with the slings and arrows of our emotional lives. This is the concept behind the term "emotional granularity," as recently featured in a public radio story about controlling anger.

Emotional granularity boils down to naming emotions (whether positive or negative) with specificity. The more precise the language we use to describe our emotional states, the more likely we are to understand that emotion, and the greater our success in controlling it. Based on research begun in the 1990s and continuing into the present, Northeastern University psychologist Lisa Feldman Barrett and her colleagues have found that persons who use more specific terms to describe their emotional experiences actually experience those emotions more precisely. Instead of being "stressed" by a low grade or negative evaluation, for example, they may be furious, or indignant, or wearied, or despondent, or crestfallen, or disconsolate.

Those who can more precisely identify what they are feeling are better at regulating and coping with their emotions. In contrast, people who have trouble distinguishing whether they are "angry" or "anxious" or "depressed" or "afraid" have trouble finding the tools to deal with their experience, just like wailing toddlers may not be able to identify whether their distress comes from hunger, overstimulation, sleeplessness, loneliness, or fear.

Emotional granularity is, fortunately, a skill that can be learned, not just an attribute of persons blessed with sensitivity. Sometimes we think that the analytical skills we develop as lawyers have negative emotional effects, but here is an instance where the ability to consciously step back and analyze our emotions can have positive effects. (Indeed, research indicates that persons with high emotional granularity are not only happier but also healthier than the general population.) Moreover, building our emotional vocabulary can assist in and of itself. The more emotional concepts we learn (whether from perusing a trusty American/English dictionary or from exposing ourselves to concepts originating in other languages and cultures), the more our brains are primed to apply the concepts we know. And as Dr. Barrett notes, "The bigger your tool kit, the more flexibly your brain can anticipate and prescribe actions, and the better you can cope with life."  

(Nancy Luebbert)

Are We Prepared for Future Students?

Another semester begins, and I proclaim the benefits of physically going to bar review lectures and taking notes with a pen on the handouts.  Students' eyes roll, unless they are already transfixed on their computer screen they didn't hear my speech.  Some will pretend to agree, but by the summer, less than 20% of our students show up for the on campus bar review course.  I groan and start thinking of new strategies to get students into seats.

Many of you have similar discussions with similar results.  I don't think I am a Luddite, but my mind wanders some days to creating a new law school called Luddite Law where wi-fi, screens, and technology are banned.  Then the next student meeting knocks on my door, sits down in my office, and proceeds to spend a couple minutes turning off the 35 different noise making devices before being able to start our meeting.  Of course, I then look at "The Facebook" on my iPhone after the meeting because those devices are addictive.

Low-tech law school is definitely a dream.  At my law school, every class that allows laptops has over 95% of students typing notes.  Less than 3-4 students hand-write exams in any given class.  The NCBE even announced they plan to move the MBE to online testing.  Technology is pervasive throughout law school buildings.

Many would agree that law school teaching has not accounted for new students and their technology.  Many professors are slow to integrate tech into the classroom, and instead of embracing the tech revolution, some merely ban laptops (which I am guilty of).  Students entering law school right now have not known a world without the internet, and they owned cell phones most of their lives.  Even if they started with a Nokia, they had the ability to instantly call someone.  They could even play the best phone game ever, snake.  Students today are engrossed in technology, and some of our teaching is behind.

Teaching is not evolving as fast as tech is progressing, and we may start falling even farther behind.  A recent Education Week Article discussed new classrooms from elementary school through high school.  The author said the environments looked more like video game arcades than classrooms.  Students learn reading comprehension and math on the computer with games that provide immediate feedback.  Studies discussed in the article did not find standardized test score improvement, but the schools utilizing the methods found "soft skill" improvement.  If the movement continues, law schools will start enrolling students in 5-10 years who learned primarily online in school.  Will we be able to teach these students with our current methods?  Should we change our methods or teach students how to succeed in our classrooms?  While Personal Jurisdiction would be fun in a computer game, would it work?

I know my Luddite Law thought is a dream, but I am concerned about the numerous different directions technology is going in legal education.  The NCBE is using more, professors are restricting use, and students enter with more tech skills.  Problems will arise, but I also trust this community to start building solutions.  I hope to be a part of the solutions eventually instead of just complaining about that new fangled technology.

(Steven Foster)

Don't Forget the February 15 Deadline for ILTL Proposals

CALL FOR PRESENTATION PROPOSALS

 Institute for Law Teaching and Learning Summer Conference

“Teaching Today’s Law Students”

June 3-5, 2019

Washburn University School of Law

Topeka, Kansas

The Institute for Law Teaching and Learning invites proposals for conference workshops addressing the many ways that law professors and administrators are reaching today’s law students.   With the ever-changing and heterogeneous nature of law students, this topic has taken on increased urgency for professors thinking about effective teaching strategies. 

The conference theme is intentionally broad and is designed to encompass a wide variety of topics – neuroscientific approaches to effective teaching; generational research about current law students; effective use of technology in the classroom; teaching first-generation college students; classroom behavior in the current political climate; academic approaches to less prepared students; fostering qualities such as growth mindset, resilience, and emotional intelligence in students; or techniques for providing effective formative feedback to students.

Accordingly, the Institute invites proposals for 60-minute workshops consistent with a broad interpretation of the conference theme. Each workshop should include materials that participants can use during the workshop and when they return to their campuses.  Presenters should model effective teaching methods by actively engaging the workshop participants.  The Institute Co-Directors are glad to work with anyone who would like advice on designing their presentations to be interactive.

To be considered for the conference, proposals should be one page (maximum), single-spaced, and include the following information:

• The title of the workshop;
• The name, address, telephone number, and email address of the presenter(s); and
• A summary of the contents of the workshop, including its goals and methods; and
• A description of the techniques the presenter will use to engage workshop participants and make the workshop interactive.

The proposal deadline is February 15, 2019.  Submit proposals via email to Professor Emily Grant, Co-Director, Institute for Law Teaching and Learning, at [email protected].

 

Two Important Words

Do we say "thank you" enough each day?

    Those two tiny words recognize the other person's help.

    Those two tiny words recognize the other person's worth.

    Those two tiny words express our gratitude.

    Those two tiny words can make someone else feel appreciated.

    Those two tiny words may be the bright spot in that other person's day.

It does not matter if we are tired, grumpy, rushed, or overwhelmed.

The excuses can be many for not taking the time to say the two tiny words.

But the excuses are not enough to excuse our overlooking the thanks.

 

And while we are at it, we want to also remember the precursor "please" before we ever even get to "thank you."

(Amy Jarmon)

Want a keyboard for lawyers?

One of my students just showed me his Legal Board which creates shortcuts for common legal symbols, words, and more. You can buy either a full keyboard that includes the Legal Board function keys or you can buy the smaller Legal Pad version that includes just the function keys and can be plugged into your laptop. The student sang the praises of the product for the time-saving on footnotes, citations, and more when he is writing papers. The website is:Legal Keyboard. (Amy Jarmon)

The Prevalence of Neuroscience Myths in Education

I count myself as an educator.  And, as I am also a lawyer too, like many attorneys, I sort of consider myself as a bit of an expert in all things too because the law, at least it seems to me, has its hook in every field of endeavor.  As such, that means that I read and think an awlful lot, and therefore, I often see myself as an arm chair scientist, psychologist, and counselor too.  

But, could a little bit of dabbling in neuroscience and learning knowledge be a bit misleading?  Unfortunately, it seems that I'm not quite the expert in neuroscience and learning that I think I am (and, to be frank, I'm not much of an expert in most things at all).

The good news, if it is good, is that it seems like I'm not all alone, at least among educators.  Indeed, research indicates that "neuromyths" are widespread among educators.  K. Macdonald, L Germine, A. Anderson, J. Christodoulou, and L. McGrath, "Dispelling the Myth," Frontiers in Psychology (Aug 2017).  In particular, according to this research article, educators can often be susceptible to neuroscience myths concerning learning.  What's a neuromyth?  Well, "[n]euromyths are misconceptions about brain research and its application to education and learning."  Based on survey results with participants indicating whether a particular statement was true or false, "[t]he most commonly endorsed neuromyths item was 'individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style (e.g., auditory, visual, kinesthetic),'" with 76 percent of educators erroneously believing in the learning style myth.  https://www.frontiersin.org/dispellingthemyth

Reading between the lines of the research article, it seems that educators like me are understandably scouring websites and media sources for the latest cure-all, really, anything at all, that might help our students improve their learning.  That's because we all understand the immense value that learning brings to individuals and to the worlds in which we inhabit.  That hunger for a solution, for a salve, for a cure-all, apparently means that as an educator I am vulnerable to neuroscience myths.  Indeed, as explained in the same research article, "[o]ne characteristic that seems to unite...neuromyths together...is an underestimation of the complexity of human behavior, especially cognitive skills like learning, memory, reasoning, and attention. Rather than highlighting these complexities, each neuromyth seems to originate from a tendency to rely on a single explanatory factor, such as the single teaching approach that will be effective for all children...."  https://www.frontiersin.org/dispellingthemyth

There's actually some very good news about the neuroscience myth concerning learning styles. It seems that classroom teachers who "weave visual and auditory modalities into a single lesson rather than providing separate modality-specific lessons to different groups of children based on self-identified learning style preferences" actually enhance learning.  As such, "[a]n unintended and potentially positive outcome of the perpetuation of the learning styles neuromyth is that teachers present material to students in novel ways through multiple modalities, thereby providing opportunities for repetition which is associated with improved learning and memory in the cognitive and educational literatures."  https://www.frontiersin.org/dispellingthemyth.  In other words, although the myth itself lacks empirical evidence to justify teaching to a particular student's preferred learning style, the method of implementation ends up producing concrete empirical evidence - according to peer-review research articles - of improvements in learning outcomes.  In short, the ends end up justifying the means, so to speak.

What do to about neuroscience myths concerning learning?  Well, the article has some suggestions.  Most to the point, the article suggests that educators ought to seek out peer-review articles behind the latest media stories and internet crazes.  Those stories might not be crazy at all, but often times, there's more lurking behind the story than first appears.  So, it's important for us as educators to take time to read the research, maybe just like we teach our students to read cases, with a critical eye.  (Scott Johns).

You Are Not Your Grades

Late January is the time of difficult discussions. 

Some students spent fall semester declaring "I'm happy as long as I get C's and can keep in law school;" a larger number (far more than 10% of the class) expected to be in the top ten percent. Quite a few never thought they would care much about their grades, one way or another. Then, suddenly, with the release of first-semester grades, 1Ls start having a different view of themselves and their place in the world. Within days, sometimes even hours, they start defining themselves, and others, in terms of GPA. This is the road to alienation and despair.

Let me be clear. Grades convey a lot of useful information to students, law schools, and potential employers. High grades do indicate that the students who earn them are mastering written legal analysis. Because of this, high GPAs open up more opportunities for those students who earn them, such as federal clerkships and positions at large, prestigious firms. Statistically, top students have higher bar passage rates. And there are obvious consequences to having very low grades -- loss of scholarships, constrained course selections at some schools, statistically lower bar passage rates, and even academic dismissal for extreme low grades.

In contrast to top grades, the message conveyed by lower grades can be complicated to parse. It can range from "You need to pay attention to the call of the question rather than plunging into a non-responsive answer" to "Studying a grand total of seven hours a week isn't cutting it" to "It's hard to do your best during exams when your best friend just got a cancer diagnosis." Because the possible causes of low grades are so varied, academic support professionals spend a lot of time trying to help our students figure out what is keeping them from being more academically successful. Every once in a while, the solution is blindingly simple: the smart but lazy seven-hour a week student pulled out of the danger zone when he doubled his study time; a driven but fearful 1L rocketed to the middle of the class in second semester when she allowed herself to put her books down and go to bed at a reasonable hour. Most often, it takes working on several fronts to effect a lasting change, as we help our students implement multiple time-effective ways of practicing the work that goes into being a lawyer -- making the mental switch from "learning the law" to "doing what a lawyer does."

Through all of this, it's vital that we model the behavior that our students are not defined by their GPAs, so they can believe and act that way too, knowing that the passions and skills our 1Ls brought to law school are part of the package that will make them good lawyers. It's heartbreaking to see top students become so consumed by maintaining their class rank that they lose their intellectual curiosity and spirit of adventure; in pure career terms, it's counterproductive because the hyper-competitive loner can cut him/herself off from success. It's equally heartbreaking to see fourth-quartile students, already working hard to improve their ability to do legal analysis, slide into the slough of despond because they falsely believe they are less valuable and less worthy of respect solely because of a GPA. The small firms that employ over half the American attorneys in private practice are less impressed by GPAs than by passionate, hard-working, and caring people with fundamental skills in problem solving, communication, negotiation, rainmaking, and time management, to name a few. Success comes in many forms: let's help our students celebrate the whole package of what will make them good lawyers. 

(Nancy Luebbert)

To His Coy 1L Students

O, why must IRAC dominate the page

When brilliant students try to write a bit,

Their eloquence confined, as in a cage,

Restricting scope and rhetoric and wit?

 

O, why must you capitulate to rote?

Abandon your unique persuasive voices?

Unless -- the logic these formats connote

Provides you with a better set of choices . . . ?

 

If you surrender to formality

You’ll find the structure helps you to direct

Your argument to only what is key,

And lets the reader know what to expect.

 

A writer who’s committed to a norm

Ironically is freed up to perform.

 

[Bill MacDonald]

Persuading Students to Logical Choices

Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day!  I hope everyone gets time to reflect on the impact of Dr. King today.  I will continue my quest to see beyond my privilege today and every day to help others.  Unfortunately, helping others at the law school sometimes requires tough conversations.

Throughout law schools the next few weeks, we will all have a similar experience.  Grades are released and some students underperformed.  He/she will walk into our office near tears with statistically little chance to improve his/her cumulative GPA high enough to stay in school.  Some schools provide programs or restart options to help students, but the vast majority of these students will forego the statistical odds.  They will incur substantial debt to not raise their GPA high enough to remain in law school.  Could we have persuaded them into the programs or restart with a different technique?  Chris Voss, former hostage negotiator, would say yes.

Voss gathered his experiences as a negotiator and wrote the book Never Split the Difference.  He utilizes multiple studies and anecdotal stories to illustrate how individuals rarely make decisions based on logic.  When negotiating, attempting to persuade the other side with logic doesn’t work.  I can do the math for students to demonstrate the minimum grades needed for the semester.  However, his/her self-belief and previous experience with good grades in undergrad causes them to believe with just a little more work, they can get Bs, which is usually above the class average.  For a few close to our good standing line, they are correct, but the students farther away rarely raise their GPA enough.  We have a fresh start restart program many of them should take, but most of them reject that option.

Persuasion with logic may not work, but Voss provides clear techniques that could help us talk with students about their situation.  The big theme of the book is to place ownership and control of the deal with the opposing party.  Individuals who perceive that they have control end up making more concessions if guided to what you want.  The guiding process is the difficult part.

The book has numerous helpful tips and strategies, and 3 of the big ones are labeling, mirroring, and calibrated questions.  Labeling is when we label negative feelings or roadblocks that occur during negotiations.  The other party tends to continue talking and divulge more information, which may be helpful in the conversion.  Labeling can provide us more information to either persuade our students or develop a more targeted strategy for them. 

Some labels can be pre-planned.  Starting a conversation (after the pleasantries) with, “I understand making a lower than expected GPA can make someone feel bad about their abilities” or “I know I will seem like the big bad professor telling you how you didn’t cut it 1^st year.”  Many times the response will ease the tension or get them to confirm the emotions.  In the middle of the conversion, we can say “it seems like you are worried about what your family will say about the situation” or other statements that relate specifically to their situation.  It seems, sounds, looks, etc. are good ways to start those sentences.

Mirroring is a great technique to continue a conversion and gather more information for labeling.  Mirroring involves both verbal and non-verbal actions.  You can repeat the last 3-4 words someone says and they will usually provide more information.  Having non-verbal upbeat cues (smiling, etc.) also encourage further discussion.  Labeling and mirroring questions generate volumes of information to work with students.

The last big strategy is calibrated questions.  Calibrated questions are questions that reject a premise or seek information without the negativity associated with no.  The questions should place control in the hands of the other party, but if calibrated correctly, can guide them to your solution.  These are usually how and what questions, almost never why questions.  When someone makes an offer in a negotiation, asking “How can I do that?” is a rejection without saying no and makes the other side create solutions for you.  Thinking about students, we can ask “what is your plan for improvement”, “how can I help you?”, and “how will we know if you are following through with your plan?”  We can also ask, “how will you get X GPA this next semester?”  The questions are designed to get students coming up with the answers and the subsequent follow up mechanism.  They will either see the best option or will take ownership of the plan to improve.  Students may even realize when trying to create a plan that the likelihood of success is low.

The next few weeks will be filled with hard conversations.  I want to see our students improve and succeed.  While I have candid conversations, I will always work with anyone to improve throughout law school.  Similar to many of you, I think guided feedback and deliberate practice can help nearly anyone.  The struggle is the required level of improvement needed for some students.  Looking at other disciplines may help us with these hard conversations.

(Steven Foster)

Perfectionism - Not a Positive

Perfectionism is often prevalent among our law students. It is not surprising that so many law students strive to be perfect. Our society goads them on. When they were in high school and college, they were the cream of the crop. They were taught that they needed to get all A grades, excel in athletics/debate/other activities, and be the president of organizations to get into the best college and the best graduate school. From the time they were very young, their parents pushed them into a plethora of after-school and weekend activities to pad their future resumes.

In their lives before law school, they could aim for perfection because they were typically heads and shoulders above their competition in getting good grades, garnering awards, and more. Now that the best and the brightest are among the best and the brightest, perfectionism can undermine their efforts and exacerbate a lot of negative traits. Perfection is impossible. Missing perfect leads to self-criticism, fear of failure, unrealistic expectations of self and others, and misery.

I wrote about the dangers of perfectionism in my October 20, 2018 post entitled Are you being sabotaged by perfectionism? The January 2019 issue of Law Practice Today has an article on Reining in Perfectionism showing the negatives of this trait when practicing lawyers fall into its grip. The personal and professional toll can be devastating.

We need to help our students achieve their academic potential, but we need to help them excel rather than aim to be perfect. (Amy Jarmon)

NCBE and LSAC Conference on Best Practices

Best Practices in High-Stakes Testing: What Legal Educators Need to Know

February 7-8, 2019

Hyatt Regency Tamaya Resort and Spa

Santa Ana Pueblo, New Mexico

 

Dear Colleague, LSAC and NCBE invite all law school faculty, researchers, and staff to a conference focused on innovative ways to measure student success. We will discuss a range of measurement topics including: bar preparation, job and skills analyses, test development, standard setting, validity and reliability, and outcomes assessments. Here are a few of the benefits of participating in this conference: ·         You will gain better insight into assessment principles and how to evaluate high-stakes tests. ·         Share your ideas and opinions about the bar exam of the future in an interactive discussion led by the NCBE Testing Task Force’s independent research consultant. ·         You will have the opportunity to let the makers of the LSAT know what additional standardized measures you would like LSAC to provide to support admissions and your educational mission. ·         You will get an inside look at changes that are on the horizon for the LSAT, including digitization and remote proctoring. Speakers include Judith Gundersen (President, NCBE), Gage Kingsbury (Psychometric Consulting), James Wollack (Professor in Quantitative Methods at University of Wisconsin), and other experts. We are pleased to be able to subsidize one person from each LSAC-member school. The subsidy covers registration, airfare, and lodging. There is a moderate registration fee for others who would like to attend. Join us and be part of the innovation! Visit LSAC.org for more details and to register.

 

Guest Blogger Post 5 - Louis Schulze: "Don't Even THINK About Using Supplements" Part Three

In my last post, I expanded on my claim that blanket policies against external sources of learning are unwise.  I focused on how those policies undermine students’ metacognition by limiting the resources available to eliminate the “unknown unknowns.”  In this post, I will continue my critique by focusing on “self-regulated learning” and “autonomy support.”

Self-regulated learning and autonomy support are both positively correlated with successful learning.  Therefore, any educational practice that undermines these concepts will also undermine learning and, thus, academic success.  What are these important concepts?

Self-regulated learning involves more than just what its name implies.  While metacognition focuses on whether a student monitors what they learned, self-regulated learning deals with whether the student monitors and tweaks how they learned.  Experts on SRL describe three stages of the process:  forethought, performance, and self-reflection.  In the first stage, the learner sets goals and considers strategic plans to attain those goals.  In the second, the learner sets out on the tasks identified in the first stage and monitors her focus and adherence to the strategies.  In the final phase, the learner evaluates whether she met the learning goals, determines the cause of attaining or not attaining the goal, and then restructures her original plan based on this causal attribution so as to improve the learning cycle and provide better results.  There is a world of difference between the learner who says “I did poorly on my first midterm because I’m not good at torts” and the learner who says “I did poorly on my first midterm because I studied wrong.”

Autonomy support is a subset of self-determination theory, whose focus is to determine the necessary conditions for optimal motivation and, in turn, optimal performance.  SDT’s first precept is that social environment matters in learning.  This “social environment” includes actions by instructors.  This means nothing more than that instructors can influence students’ success.  This can occur when a student perceives a high degree of autonomy support, i.e., an environment in which instructors support the learner’s ownership of learning.  Autonomy supportive environments conduce to powerful “intrinsic motivation,” while controlled learning environments conduce to weaker “extrinsic motivation.”  As one study put it:

    "[A]n individual in a position of authority (e.g., an instructor) takes the other’s (e.g., a      student’s) perspective, acknowledges the other’s feelings, and provides the other with         pertinent information and opportunities for choice, while minimizing the use of pressures       and demands. An autonomy-supportive teacher might, for example, provide                 students with    necessary information while encouraging them to use the information in solving a          problem in their own way. In contrast, an authority who is controlling     pressures others to          behave in particular ways, either through coercive or seductive techniques that generally             include implicit or explicit rewards or punishments.” (Black     & Deci, 2000)

Importantly, heightened levels of perceived autonomy support are correlated with autonomous self-regulation.  Self-regulation, in turn, is correlated with improved academic performance.  Therefore, if we undermine perceived autonomy support by using blanket prohibitions against extrinsic materials, we make it less likely that students will self-regulate their learning.  If we make it less likely that students will self-regulate, they will not learn optimally.  If they do not learn optimally, their performance in law school, the bar exam, and in practice will suffer.

In fact, by overly controlling students’ learning autonomy, we undermine the likelihood that they will be good lawyers.  We can all agree that a new lawyer who can act autonomously and without a supervisor’s handholding is a more valuable employee and better lawyer than one who needs constant oversight.  By controlling students’ learning methods, we inhibit students’ growth into being “self-regulated lawyers,” and we condemn them to a career of second-rate lawyering and perpetual oversight by superiors.

In my next post, I will discuss how bans on external learning sources run afoul of one of the most powerful tools students can use to improve their learning.  

 

 

The Power of Performance Reviews (and Feedback) to Influence Retention & Improve Performance

As educators, we hold enormous power in our hands; power to change destinations and shape destinies.  

Last fall, at the AccessLex Legal Education Research Symposium, Dr. Paola Cecchi-Dimeglio - Chair of the Executive Leadership Research Initiative for Women and Minority Attorneys at Harvard Law School - changed the way that I think when giving "performance reviews" to my students, whether in formal feedback, informally during class discussions, or during individual student meetings.  

The best way to express what I learned is to hear directly from Dr. Checchi-Dimeglio as she describes her research on the power of performance reviews to shape career destinies:  "Let me give you an example: the annual performance review. We’ve all been through it, either as a reviewer or as a reviewee. It can be dreadful because it's time-consuming and nerve-racking. What I found is women and minorities overall, were more likely to receive different types of feedback–more critical. Their successes were oftentimes attributed to luck. Based off of that, working with an organization, we came out with a new system that required more frequent performance reviews that would take less than fifteen minutes, where four to six people could be reviewed at the same time. The result was amazing." https://mgte.thefemalequotient.com

As I recall from her keynote address (with apologies if I don't remember precisely), Dr. Checchi-Dimeglio explained that she observed the interactions between supervisors (partners) and employees (junior associates) during performance reviews.   Overall, Dr. Checchi-Dimeglio observed that performance review comments differed between male and females associates.  In general, partners provided women with feedback focused on the past (leaving recipients with the message that this law firm wasn't the place for them); while, in contrast, partners provided men with feedback that was forward-looking (suggesting to recipients that there was work to do to improve performance but that the firm was in it for the long-haul with them, as exemplified by supervisory comments such as "you might try this to better persuade the court next time," etc).    Based on these findings, Dr. Checchi-Dimeglio empowered supervisors with ways to retool their comments for all associates by focusing on the future rather than the past, regardless of gender.  The results...retention significantly improved for women associates.

That brings me back to my role (our roles) as educators.  Our comments can make a difference; our feedback can change paths.  I often recall that I had a law professor who told me, point blank, that I would never be a litigator.  I just didn't have what it took.  That feedback stuck (and still sticks) to the heart.  But, I had others who encouraged me, believed in me, and supported me.  In short, their constructive feedback - focused on improving my performance with an eye to the future - won the day.  I became a litigator.  As a result of those experiences and in light of Dr. Checchi-Dimeglio's research as a behavioral scientist, my comments can make a truly positive difference for my students. Do I do it well?  Not yet.  But, I'm learning, one comment at a time...with an eye on my students' futures.  (Scott Johns).

Suffolk Position for Bar Preparation Specialist

BAR PREPARATION SPECIALIST  

SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL in Boston invites applications for a full-time position as Bar Preparation Specialist, starting in January 2019. The Bar Preparation Specialist will work with the Law School’s Senior Bar Preparation Specialist and under the supervision of the Law School’s Faculty Director of Bar Programs and Initiatives to provide individualized instruction and tutoring for students preparing to take the Massachusetts Uniform Bar Exam. The Bar Preparation Specialist will be expected to:

• Meet regularly with students to develop and implement personalized study plans
• Provide regular individualized feedback to students on practice essays and assessments
• Teach and reinforce sound test-taking skills and strategies
• Assist students in understanding bar review course material and examination subject matter
• Closely monitor student effort and performance in their summer bar review courses
• Report regularly on student progress to supervising faculty director
• Provide assistance as needed to instructors of credit-bearing bar preparation courses and potentially teach such courses as an adjunct in the future

Applicants must have a J.D. and be admitted to the bar to be considered. Membership in the Massachusetts bar is strongly preferred. Prior experience in teaching bar review courses and interacting with students in an academic support setting are highly desirable. http://app.jobvite.com/m?3ywIhkwS 

Suffolk Law is an equal opportunity employer and will give careful consideration to all qualified applicants regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, genetic information, veteran status, or any other characteristic protected by law. Suffolk Law is committed to diversity and strongly encourages applicants from historically under-represented groups. For more information on Suffolk Law’s commitment to diversity, please see http://www.suffolk.edu/campuslife/3512.php.

 

Listening to Learners

This may not be true in every law school, but at my school, things are a little quiet right now.  Some students and professors are on campus for the brief winter term, but the entire community will not return until the spring term begins in February.  The students are just now getting their fall grades, so the students who are around and have come looking for me have all wanted to talk about them -- whether they were surprised or disappointed or content, and what their grades might mean for the future.

I cannot help but be reminded by this combination of relative quiet and conversationally-motivated students of the importance of listening.  Like many teachers -- and many lawyers -- I revel in talking.  I like explaining things to people; I enjoy the performative aspects of a well-delivered lecture; I am fond of delivering spontaneous oracular pronouncements to my advisees.  And, aiming to communicate complex information in a useful way, I spend a fair amount of time fretting about the content of what I say and the manner in which I say it.  This is entirely appropriate: our students' expectations are high, their goals are ambitious, and their needs are great.  They deserve to hear wise and engaging words coming out of our mouths.

Still, nobody wants to be nothing but a bunch of talk.  If that's all you've got, you might as well just throw books at your students.  Listening is the complementary skill that helps to make sure that what we say possesses the value that our students need.  It's how we determine precisely which beautiful insights we choose to articulate.

As with many skills, people are not always good at judging how well they listen.  Those to whom it comes naturally may underestimate how talented they actually are.  Others may mistake mere silence for listening, or may assume that they are listening well because they are quickly assessing and generating responses to what they are hearing.  One way to more accurately judge -- and, if necessary, improve upon -- one's listening skills is to consider whether you are achieving any or all of these three outcomes:

1. Determining what is troubling the speaker.  In many or even most cases, this is ostensibly the reason we are talking with our students in the first place.  They come to us with an issue or a concern, and we introduce conversational probes to figure out what the source of the problem is.  Ironically, though, the better and more experienced we get at our jobs, the easier it may become to jump to quick conclusions.  This speed, borne of experience, can be valuable, but we must take care not to confuse our satisfaction at having identified a likely issue with the student's confidence that they have actually conveyed the concerns they had.  Watch their facial expressions and body language.  Do they appear relieved, as if they have gotten something off of their chest, or are they still holding on to some tension?  Listen to the tone of their voice -- do they sound unsure?  Do they seem to want to interject more into the discussion?  Try not to judge how well you have listened for their concerns by how you feel about the conversation, but by how they appear to feel.  When in doubt, before making any definitive declarations of diagnosis, reflect the conversation back to them.  Statements like "It sounds like you feel you do not understand the law correctly" can be non-threatening ways to offer the speaker a chance to clarify what they mean to say, and you may find that there are more or different issues from what you had first suspected.
2. Encouraging the speaker to dig deeper.  Sometimes students do not come to us entirely of their own free will; they are advised or even required to meet with us, and they just want to get it over with.  Other students may come anxiously to us, fearing complicated bad news and hoping instead to hear a quick fix.  Students like these might be content to give a brief synopsis of what they assume is the problem, in hopes that we will take over the conversation and get to the end as quickly as possible.  Such situations provide great opportunities to use your listening skills as active conversational tools.  Simply maintaining eye contact and keeping silent will prompt a speaker to continue to speak, sometimes revealing additional information in their stream-of-consciousness monologue.  If silence is not enough, a brief reflective question, based on what you have already heard, may help.  Even non-reluctant students can benefit from this kind of prompting.  If a student makes an assertion that sounds too pat or incomplete, attentive listening can encourage them to keep pressing on to try to get to the critical facts or to their real emotions.  Personally, I think every student conversation of more than just a few minutes should include at least one instance of focused, silent attention on the student, to give them the opportunity to elaborate on a point or to bring up a new one.
3. Developing the speaker's trust.  Trust is valuable currency in our job, and like Bitcoin, it can take some time to generate.  It is great to be trusted for our sound advice, but that is not the only way to build trust.  Listening is another great way, and this illustrates why good listening is not mere passive silence but is actually active participation in the conversation.  A good listener demonstrates that they are hearing the information being conveyed by reflecting back some of what they've heard and by following up with questions that build off of that information.  What is also just as important, and in some cases is even more so, is that we attend to our student's affect as well -- not just the information, but the emotion.  Students can bring to Academic Success some intense feelings -- excitement and hope, when things are going well, or anxiety, sadness, and anger when they are not.  Acknowledging these sometimes uncomfortable feelings in a non-judgmental way, through our own facial expressions and responses, can help a student feel not only that are you listening to all they are saying, but also that your office is a safe place to experience and express those feelings.  This is a sure way to develop the trust that is often needed to get students to buy into your plans for their success.

These outcomes are noteworthy not just because they are the effects of good listening, but because they are specifically effects that are valuable to our work in Academic Success.  Even when things get hectic and tiring over the next few months, try to make a point of asking yourself, after every student encounter, if you are seeing any of these outcomes arising from your conversations.

[Bill MacDonald]

Raise the Temperature to Reach Your Boil

As the winter continues, my colleagues make more and more hot tea.  The Keurig makes that process much easier, but when thinking about the upcoming semester, making tea in a tea pot comes to mind.  The way many people view success and habits is inconsistent with reality.  Success is generally like making hot tea.

To make hot tea, you fill the tea pot with water and turn on the burner.  The water looks calm and is cool to the touch.  The burner begins heating the water, but the water remains still.  The water continues to heat and reaches 150 degrees but remains still.  After more time, the water reaches 200 degrees.  Nothing happens.  The temperature rises to 211 degrees, and the water remains still.  However, in a mere instant when reaching 212 degrees, water begins to boil with bubbles bursting on the surface.  The water looks nothing like the calm from only 1 degree before.  The constant rise in temperature didn’t produce anything to see, but each degree brought the water one step closer to boiling.  Each step made a difference.

Law studying is similar to the tea pot.  Spending five more minutes looking at materials doesn’t produce immediate results.  Doing another set of practice questions doesn’t generate instant gratification.  Finding another supplement may not help answer more Socratic questions in class.  However, all of those actions raise the level of understanding in a subject.  The continued work throughout the semester raising the temperature can lead to hitting the boiling point on final exams.

The book Pounding the Stone tells a fictional story about this idea.  The book’s title refers to a poem about a stone cutter.  The premise is the stone cutter hammers away at a stone.  Each blow has an impact, but the impact is not seen.  At a certain point, the next blow cracks the stone.  Persistence, grit, and habitually doing the small things in spite of no visual feedback produced the remarkable result.

The stone cutter is another good analogy for law school.  Many students don’t understand the big picture of a subject until the end of the semester.  The large outline is not clear until delving deeper into the material to determine how topics relate to each other.  Reading cases doesn’t seem to produce much understanding outside the holding of the particular case.  Professor questions are hard to relate to previous classes.  The feedback for whether students understand the material doesn’t happen for months.  Pounding the stone is difficult but necessary for success.

Approaching this semester, I urge students to “pound the stone” as the book dictates.  Make sure to do the fundamentals of studying and practice to reach the boiling point.  Read every page of the assigned readings carefully, which may require many students to slow down.  Brief every major case.  Create a comprehensive outline, chart, or other study tool.  Meet with faculty regularly to clear up misunderstandings.  Complete practice questions and receive feedback.  Craig Groeschel said it best, “Successful people do consistently what normal people do occasionally.”  Results won’t be immediate.  Finals don’t happen in February.  Be consistent and pound the stone this semester to be prepared for finals.

(Steven Foster)

Part-Time Position at CLEO

Kent Lollis at LSAC recently alerted the listserv to a part-time opening at CLEO. More information about CLEO can be found at https://cleoinc.org/ .

Part-time Academic and Bar Passage Consultant
Council on Legal Education Opportunity, Inc
$25,000 / year

Brief Description of Duties
The Academic and Bar Passage Consultant assists the CLEO team in all aspects of their Bar Passage programs for CLEO law students and those preparing for the bar examination. Most of the activities will be conducted via webinars and videoconferencing. Hours will vary depending on the time of year and student needs. This is a 12-month position that includes academic support and bar preparation activities for incoming students, current students, and CLEO alumni.

 
Essential Duties and Responsibilities

• Conduct three 1L Prep – Attitude Is Essential online workshops in the summer for incoming law students;
• Carry out Academic Success Webinar in the fall for first-year law students;
• Assist 1L students to prepare for exams as needed;
• Coordinate and implement diagnostic bar examinations for incoming students in the fall and for current students at the end of the spring semester;
• Organize and execute the spring semester bar passage webinars for 1Ls, 2Ls, and 3Ls.
• Manage a bar passage program for alumni;
• Provide individual counseling and tutoring to students as needed;
• Other duties related to academic support, success, retention, and bar passage as assigned.

Minimum Job Requirements

• Applicants must possess a juris doctorate (J.D.) degree with a record of high academic achievement from an ABA-accredited law school. Applicants must also be a member in good standing of any bar in the United States.
• The ideal candidate should have experience in academic support or teaching, at the college or law school level.
• Evening and weekend work is required.

Required Competencies

• Excellent social media and information technology skills.
• Excellent writing, speaking, interpersonal, problem-solving, and organizational skills.
• Demonstrated commitment to the CLEO mission of assisting students from underrepresented communities become successful legal practitioners.
• Ability to exercise initiative and creativity in implementing responsibilities.
• Dedication to students, commitment to excellence in creating and providing student support services and ensuring student success.
• Commitment to working in a collaborative environment with other team members.

Reminder: January 14th deadline for AASE Proposals

Please see the following document if you want to submit a proposal: Download 2019 AASE Conference Call for Proposals. The link to the online form is: https://goo.gl/forms/XFqeARn92D40cmqg1.

More on Food Insecurity on College Campuses

We have blogged about this issue in the past. Although most of the conversation in higher education centers on undergraduates, we all know law students who struggle financially and have had to choose other priorities than eating.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office published a new report on food insecurity on college campuses for low-income students: GAO Report on Food Insecurity. Articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education and Inside Higher Education have recently published stories on food insecurity. The links for The Chronicle are here: 3 Takeaways and Student Stories. The link for Inside Higher Ed is here: Federal Report on College Students and Hunger.

Although there is a focus in the report on how to get more eligible students lined up with the SNAP benefit, the truth is that there are a number of students who are ineligible for government programs and who have food insecurity. They are above the financial cut-offs, but do not have enough loan or other income to make ends meet every month. These are not students who do not know how to manage money or who live frivolously. They live very frugally, and juggle rent, utilities, tuition, fees, books, gas, prescriptions, and perhaps child care. The dollars run out before the days in the month do.

I can empathize. I well-remember end-of-the-month shortfalls waiting for the next stipend check during graduate school. I would spend the last week eating crackers and hot tea at my graduate assistant desk. I only bought essentials, paid bills, and ate a lot of soup, pasta, and stir fry the rest of month to stretch my dollars. Students these days are Ramen-noodle pros - no wonder the noodles are a bulk item at the food warehouses. (We won't even get into the good nutrition versus poor-nutrition foods debate.)

It is hard to study and focus your mind when you are hungry. So how do we help our students?

Certainly if they are eligible for SNAP, then information should be available to them to get them to sign up - despite the stigma they feel. In a few cases, they may be able to work with the financial aid office to review their aid budget for an increase - but if that just means increased loan eligibility, then students are often reticent to go that route. Some law schools have emergency loan funds with low or no interest. Our university has a food pantry available for students. Students comment that speakers and meetings where food is provided allow them to get some extra meals that week.

Maybe one of the best ways ASP'ers can help is to be more on alert to the possibility that some students are going hungry. Some gentle questioning and listening may provide us with previously overlooked opportunities to help our students get assistance in this area. (Amy Jarmon)

Starting the Day Off Slow Might be the Right Step to the Fast Track

At my law school, we're in the midst of the first week of classes after the long break.  It seems like there's no time to pause.  Everyone's busy and bustling; places to go and people to see.  In fact, sometimes I wonder if we are moving so fast that we might be missing out in one of the best things in life - the present.

That's when I got a bit of startle while reading the newspaper.  It seems that there's value in staring the day-off slowly, without the frantic rush. According to a Norwegian think tank (as referenced in a newspaper article this past week), "staring the day with intentional slowness helps spark creative thinking," and that's something I sorely need, especially as an educator.  E. Byron, "Wellness: What's the Rush? The Power of Slow Mornings," The Wall Street Journal, January 9, 2019, A22.  

Unfortunately, too often, I start my day with my phone, checking email.  And, let me be frank.  With apologies to my email senders, I've never yet received any creative impulses or stirring messages from my dash to check my email at the start of each day.  Instead, it seems like starting with email has left me chasing circles, getting nowhere fast.  It's not that emails are not important; it's that emails should not dictate my priorities.  People should. 

Nevertheless, I seem to have this overwhelming habit to have to check my phone.  And, apparently, I'm not alone.  According to the same article, "[M]ore than 60% of [people] say that they look at their phone within 15 minutes of waking and check their phones about 52 times a day." Id.  That sure seems like a lot...and a lot of wasteful checking, too.

So, here's some ideas to help you (and me) get our days started out strong. First, don't dare sleep with your phone.  Rather, put it far away from you.  Indeed, use an old-fashioned alarm clock to wake up in the morning, instead of putting your phone within arm's reach right at the beginning of your day.  Second, turn it off.  That's right.  You be the pilot of your phone; take command. Let your phone work for you.  You decide when it's time to turn on your phone to check your email, text messages, or social media accounts.  Third, relax.  Take deep breathes.  Appreciate life.  Take the opportunity at the beginning of the day to express gratitude. In short, start the day right by living in the present, fully alive and fully present.  In my own case, that means that I'm choosing to turn out much of the noise in my life.  And, interestingly, that's leading to more productive days, less fretting, more creative teaching ideas, increased opportunities for spontaneity in learning with my students, more time to listen to and be present with others, and just in general enjoy the moment.  So, here's to starting out slower each day as the key to actually getting more done.

P.S. For more information about how smart phones impact our cognitive lives as learners, our emotional well-being, and even our biological and physiological selves, please see an article that I recently wrote based on a previous blog: http://www.dbadocket.org/wellness-corner-smart-phone-dilemma  

(Scott Johns)