Law School Academic Support Blog

Baking and Growth Mindset....again

So, you may, or may not, remember my yule log. As I mastered the art of making a roulade, or rolled cake, it made me think of growth mindset and legal writing. 

Last month, well in May,  I traveled to St. Louis for the virtual AASE Conference. Yes, I realize I didn’t have to leave my home, or even my yoga pants, for a virtual conference. But I decided to join fellow AASE member and my co-author, Toni Miceli, as we are both vaccinated, so we could enjoy the conference together. There may have also been the real need to work on finalizing some teacher’s manual materials for our book, as well as bake with her son, Alex. Both clearly, equally important.

Alex loves to bake, and loves to learn about baking. Specifically, I think he loves to decorate more than the baking part, and I’m not sure I can blame him. Plus, he’s getting good at it!

So, he heard that I might be coming to his house for a visit, and kindly asked whether we could make a layered cake. (Fun fact, when I was 6 I wrote in one of those school projects that “I want to be a layer when I grow up”. Well, now I am a lawyer that can layer! Sorry, I’ll see myself out.)

Alex wanted a 3-tiered ocean themed cake. I assured him that we could make this happen, but we would have to learn some new things together.

See, as much as I love to bake, I’ve never really layered things before. So, this became my opportunity to continue my baking growth mindset. See, I had mastered the rolled cake (I use the term “mastered” loosely), but that doesn’t mean I can make ALL cakes expertly. And just like with the rolled cake, while I could transfer SOME skills, many were still brand new.

Now, last time I tried layering a cake it had a distinct Leaning Tower of Pisa vibe that was not part of my vision. So, this time around I did some research, and discovered that – a ha – I needed to use dowels and cardboard to stack the layers. Fantastic! So, Toni went out and bought a set. Then, I watched multiple videos on stacking. Finally, the day came – we were going to stack these cakes! Six of them to be precise, for a grand total of three tiers! Toni and I read the directions for the layering kit carefully, remembered the video, and viola – success. Well, there was still a minor tilt or two that we smoothed with icing. But overall, a resounding success.

Similarly, in law school you will learn many new skills. And most of them transfer to new situations and assignments. However, you often have to tweak these skills, adapting them to new situations (or more likely, varied types of legal writing), just like I had to adapt to a new style of cake!

The two most important steps in adapting to this new style of cake making were to  1) read the directions before hand and carefully follow those directions and 2) have patience. It also helped to work in collaboration. Toni and I are both skilled and experienced bakers, but putting our skills together meant we likely got a better result than we would have working by ourselves. Unless otherwise prohibited, work with your study groups, or even just one partner. If you are in law school, you are a skilled and experienced student, and combining your skills and experience with others skilled and experienced students might help you refine the new skill a bit faster!

Finally, don’t be afraid to ask questions or try new techniques. Or rather, just think outside of the box. One of the joys of baking with Toni’s son was seeing growth mindset in real time, through a child’s eyes. Alex is learning new baking skills all the time, and eager to learn new things. He’s getting better and better at baking and decorating because he’s not afraid to fail. We decided to try to make our seaweed out of melting chocolate (remember, this was an ocean themed cake, so seaweed was a must). I will admit that I had never done this before, and am not great at “freehand” chocolate. I told Alex as much, and very wisely he said “Well, let’s try. If it’s bad, it’s still chocolate – we can eat it!”

So true – and I encourage us all to adopt Alex’s attitude in all things – if it’s bad, it’s still chocolate and we can eat it!

Bon Appetit!

(Melissa Hale)

ASP Writers' Block Tomorrow

ASP Writers’ Block 2nd session of the summer is Monday, June 28th.  

As a reminder: we work independently in one another’s company for 2 pomodoro cycles (25 minutes each), then briefly share what we are working on and solicit any feedback needed from our colleagues. Thus meetings usually last for about an hour and 20 minutes, though everyone is welcome to join in whatever portion they can attend.

Next two dates are:  July 19, August 2.

Zoom link information in the google group.

Call for Proposals from AALS Section on Academic Support

CALL FOR PRESENTATION PROPOSALS

For a Joint Presentation by the
AALS Section on Academic Support and Section on Technology, Law, and Education

“Online Teaching: Is it good for legal education? Which professors are doing it? And who owns the content once it is created?”
(Working Title/Theme Subject to Change)

Program Description
The theme for the AALS 2022 Annual Meeting is “Freedom, Equality, and the Common Good.” We seek to explore these topics as they relate to the intersection of academic support and distance legal education. First, we hope to explore whether distance legal education (a.k.a. online teaching) serves the Common Good in legal education. In other words, does technology help or hurt legal education? Next, we plan to pivot to the question of Equality. Are all faculty equally expected to contribute to courses dealing with technology and are faculty compensated adequately (whether time and/or money) for their time in developing asynchronous content? Finally, the presentation will conclude with a discussion of Academic Freedom. Most notably, who owns the work?

Some ideas with these themes may include, but are not limited to:

Common Good
• Did the rise of Zoom Law during a worldwide pandemic help or hurt the development of online teaching?
• Is tech a legitimate delivery method?
• How to overcome the argument regarding lack of engagement?
• Is there a specific type of course that is better suited to be online, and conversely, courses that should never be taught online?
• Which types of technology most effectively maximize student learning and help develop skills?

Equality
• Within a law school, who typically creates and teaches online courses?
• Are certain technology focused courses like E-discovery taught by certain types of faculty?
• What type of courses should be taught online?
• Who is using technology in the classroom?
• Are all technologies really equal or do certain types of technology provide more effective tools for learners than others?

Academic Freedom
• Who owns the work?
• Does your university have a policy regarding the creation and retention of asynchronous courses?
• What happens to an already prepared online course when a professor leaves the institution, or even dies?
• Will the rise of “canned” online courses lead to faculty teaching themselves out of a job?

The Section on Technology, Law, and Education and the Section on Academic Support seek to explore these questions and related issues at the January 2022 AALS Annual (virtual)

Meeting during their joint program.

Call for Presenters

Proposals should contain a detailed explanation of both the substance of the presentation and the methods to be employed. Individuals as well as groups are invited to propose topics. The Committee would prefer to highlight talent across a spectrum of law schools and disciplines and is especially interested in new and innovative ideas. Please share this call with colleagues—both within and outside of the legal academy and the academic support community.

Submission Guidelines

Proposals must include the following information:
• A title for your presentation.
• A brief description of the objectives or outcomes of your presentation.
• A brief description of how your presentation will support your stated objectives or outcomes.
• The amount of time requested for your presentation. No single presenter should exceed 45 minutes in total. Presentations as short as 15 minutes are welcomed.
• A detailed description of both the substantive content and the techniques to be employed, if any, to engage the audience.
• Whether you plan to distribute handouts, use PowerPoint, or employ other technology.
• A list of the conferences at which you have presented within the last three years, such as AALS, AASE, or other academic conferences. (The Committee is interested in this information because we wish to select and showcase seasoned, as well as fresh, talent.)
• Your school affiliation, title, courses taught, and contact information (please include email address and telephone number).
• Any articles or books that you have published that relate to your proposed presentation.
• Any other information you think will help the Committee appreciate the value your presentation will provide.

Please submit your proposal to the Academic Support Programming Chair, Kirsha Trychta, at [email protected] by June 30, 2021. The Committee anticipates notifying those who have been selected to present on/around July 14, 2021.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact one of the Programming Co-Chairs: Natalie Rodriguez at [email protected], Kirsha Weyandt Trychta at [email protected], or Michelle Zakarin at [email protected].

High Water Mark for UBE?

Hat tip to Greg Bordelon for sending out the link to New York's report on the UBE.  You can find the report here: 

https://nysba.org/app/uploads/2021/06/9.-Task-Force-on-the-New-York-Bar-Examination-with-staff-memo.pdf

I found this paragraph interesting:

The Task Force reaffirms its central recommendation that applicants for admission to

practice law in New York be required to demonstrate basic knowledge of New York law. It

remains our view that, if passage of a Bar Examination is either the exclusive, or an alternative,

pathway to practice in New York, that examination should include a rigorous test on matters of

New York law. We strongly believe that persons seeking admission to practice law in New

York must be required to demonstrate that they are able to do so competently. Given the unique

complexities of the New York legal landscape, including an elaborate court structure, a

complicated civil practice code, and distinctive rules governing evidence, family law, and trusts

and estates, among a myriad of legal principles unique to New York, it is not enough that an

applicant show competence solely with reference to the “law of nowhere.”

 

This paragraph is the reason I erroneously believed New York would never adopt the UBE in the first place.  Many argue NY adoption is what led many other states to follow, including Texas.  Texas adoption is what led to Oklahoma, etc.  If this is a concern, NY probably shouldn't have adopted the UBE.  

The other interesting conclusion from the report is the worry that the new bar exam in 5 years will be even worse than the UBE.  I will admit to being skeptical of the entire bar task force process, but I was actually impressed with a few of the choices on the drafting committee (I am sure I would be impressed with others, I just didn't know everyone).  The new bar exam may be the best measure of minimum competence the legal profession has seen, and we may also see states flee from it.  The next 4-5 years will be interesting.

(Steven Foster)

Academic and Bar Support Scholarship Spotlight

Rachel Lopez (Drexel), Unentitled: The Power of Designation in the Legal Academy, 73 Rutgers L. Rev. 101 (2021).

Note:  This piece is important.  I urge all who frequent this blog to read it.  Professor Lopez explores the gender and racial dimensions of subordination by title.  As she puts it most poignantly:  "If law schools truly aspire to be anti-racist institutions, as so many have pledged to be, we must acknowledge and hopefully someday soon address the racial and gendered (often intersectional) dynamics of titles in the legal academy."

From the abstract:

Last December, the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed that questioned whether Dr. Jill Biden should more appropriately be addressed as Madame First Lady, Mrs. Biden, Jill, or even kiddo, characterizing her desire to be called doctor “fraudulent” and a “touch comic.” Many were understandably outraged by the lack of respect afforded to Dr. Biden, which had a distinctly gendered dimension. More recently, after a controversial decision by the University of North Carolina’s board of trustees to deny her tenure, Nikole Hannah-Jones, a Pulitzer Prize and MacArthur “genius grant” winner, was instead appointed as a “Professor of Practice” on a five year fixed term contract. These high-profile examples put in sharp focus what many women of color in the legal academy already know all too well: labels have an innate power to confer or diminish status. This Essay explores the role that titles play in the legal academy and, in particular, their often depreciative consequences for women of color. Drawing from my story, those relayed to me by others, and other empirical evidence, I will show how titles perpetuate stereotypes and entrench existing racial and gender hierarchies in the legal academy, although they appear race- and gender-neutral.

It is no secret that the legal academy is extraordinarily hierarchical, with women and people of color often populating the lower ranks of the totem pole. There is a stinging irony to this. As Ruth Gordon eloquently put it, “many of us spend our professional lives contesting hierarchy and exclusion—whether on the basis of race, gender, or class—but when it comes to academia—and I would suggest especially legal academia—we appear to have finally found a hierarchy we can believe in.” There is a problem of academic exceptionalism in the legal academy—hierarchy and exclusion are others’ problems, not our own.

Labels, in the form of titles, help cement these disparities, concretizing them into a caste system that justify unequal pay, less power in faculty governance, and, at times, abusive behavior. While doctrinal professors are “Professors of Law,” the academic archetype, the legal academy has developed a virtual cottage industry of other professional designations. These titles denote “the other teachers” in the legal academy: Clinical Professor, Professor of Practice, Teaching Professor, and Legal Writing Instructor, to name a few. The message is that “Professors of Law” are the ones who really teach the law, while those with the other titles teach something else less important.

If law schools truly aspire to be anti-racist institutions, as so many have pledged to be, we must acknowledge and hopefully someday soon address the racial and gendered (often intersectional) dynamics of titles in the legal academy.

(h/t: Tax Prof Blog)

(Louis Schulze, FIU Law)

Academic and Bar Support Scholarship Spotlight

Janet Thompson Jackson (Washburn), Wellness and Law: Reforming Legal Education to Support Student Wellness, 65 How. L. J. __ (2021):

From the abstract:

No one goes to law school with the expectation that their mental health and overall well-being will be significantly compromised during those three years. But, for a substantial number of law students, it is. It does not have to be this way.

This is not a typical law review article. It cannot afford to be. Most law students begin law school as reasonably happy and well-adjusted people. We must ask, what is it about law school that contributes to the disproportionate decline in student wellness? The answer to that question is complex because many of the very factors that make good lawyers also contribute to their mental health challenges.

(h/t:  Tax Prof Blog).

Ruggero J. Aldisert, Stephen Clowney, and Jeremy D. Peterson, Logic for Law Students: How to Think Like a Lawyer, 69 Pitt. L. Rev. 100 (2007).

From the abstract:

Law schools no longer teach logic. In the authors' view this is tragic, given that the fundamental principles of logic continue to undergird the law and guide the thinking of judges. In an effort to reverse the trend, this essay explains the core principles of logic and how they apply in the law school classroom. The manuscript begins by examining the basics of the deductive syllogisms and then turns to inductive generalizations and the uses and abuses of analogies. The authors claim that students who master the basics of logic laid out in this article will be better lawyers and will feel more comfortable when they find themselves presenting arguments to judges and juries.

(Louis Schulze, FIU Law)

Assistant Director of Academic Achievement at Cal Western

Asst Dir Academic Achievement

Full TimeProfessional

San Diego, CA, US

8 days agoRequisition ID: 1055

APPLYTO ASST DIR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

California Western School of Law (CWSL) is seeking applications for the Assistant Director of Academic Achievement.   Under the direct supervision of the Assistant Dean for Academic Achievement, the Assistant Director of Academic Achievement provides academic and bar exam preparation support to law students and graduates, particularly those academically at risk.  The Assistant Director is primarily responsible for supervising the first year and upper division tutoring program, presenting skills workshops, and working with first-year students who are facing academic difficulty.  The Assistant Director teaches the first year skills course for academically at-risk students and other skills courses as determined by the Vice Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Assistant Dean for Academic Achievement, as well as assists alumni who are studying for the California bar exam.

Primary Responsibilities (include but are not limited to):

• Assist in hiring and supervising teaching fellows in the CWSL tutoring programs (large-group tutoring and small-group labs).
• Maintain CWSL website information for the Academic Achievement Department. 
• Develop course plan and teach Skills Workshops and Labs to 1L students.
• Counsel individual students to help them improve study and exam-taking skills.
• Collaborate with faculty and staff in programming and analysis of pilot programs for 1L students.
• Assist in developing and teaching academic support program for second-trimester students.
• Teach sections of first year academic support courses and workshops.
• Teach sections of either the Academic Achievement Workshop, Advanced Legal Analysis, or Pre-Bar to upper division students as needed.
• Teach other skills courses as determined by the Vice Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Assistant Dean for Academic Achievement.
• Works with Assistant Dean and Associate Director of Academic Achievement to: 
  1. Cross-teach as necessary in CWSL Bar Program courses to ensure continuity in pedagogy with overall Academic Achievement Department goals.
  2. Support and tutor CWSL alumni participating in the graduate component of the CWSL bar review program.
  3. Assist in the collection of data and the analysis of CWSL Bar Program effectiveness, including maintain statistics of bar exam performance.
• Develop and maintain a high level of knowledge about academic support and bar preparation programs, techniques, and methods.
• Schedule meetings, tutoring, and bar review sessions, including room reservations, audio visual and coordinating schedules.
• Cooperate with other CWSL employees in matters of scheduling, room reservations, etcetera.
• Draft and/or edit letters, reports, memoranda, classroom instructional materials, posters, and other materials as needed.
• Effectively plan, organize, and schedule teaching fellows tutoring sessions. 
• Set and enforce policies and procedures for tutoring programs.
• Supervise Teaching Fellows:
  1. Work with faculty to ensure teaching fellows meet identified needs and expectations.
  2. In coordination with assigned faculty, hire, train, coach, discipline and evaluate tutors.
  3. Delegate effectively to ensure workload is balanced for efficiency and effectiveness.
  4. Provide appropriate feedback and coaching to assigned tutors on a regular basis.
  5. Accountable for tutors’ performance results.
• Attend law school functions as the representative of the department.
• Report as needed, verbally or in writing, to the Board of Trustees, the Dean, the Vice Dean of Academic and Student Affairs, and other senior administration.
• Coordinate with other departments to plan and implement effective program initiatives.
• Be accountable for work product.
• Work with appropriate level of assistance, instruction and supervision.
• Proactively advise the Assistant Dean of project status, potential issues, and overall departmental progress.
• Suggest strategies to promote productivity and service.
• Perform, with team approach, other duties as required.

 

Qualifications:

• Juris Doctor Degree from an ABA-accredited law school; successful passage of California Bar exam.
• At least three to four years of law teaching experience in an academic support or bar preparation program required, experience in both programs preferred.
• Two years of supervisory experience, preferred.
• Experience in course planning, classroom presentations, and one-on-one tutoring; experience in learning theories and effective pedagogy, including formative and summative assessment; and knowledge of California Civil Procedure preferred.
• An equivalent combination of education and experience may be substituted.
• Individual must be a self-starter and demonstrate a sound work ethic.
• Must be able to function independently with minimal oversight.
• Must demonstrate a passion for working with students and have a track record of developing robust relationships with students and faculty.  

Computer Skills:

• Intermediate level computer skills.
• Intermediate experience in Microsoft Office Suite, including MS Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint.
• Knowledge of effective internet search properties. 
• Experience with website management, electronic communication and database systems, data analysis and interpretation preferred.
• Must be highly proficient with legal research databases such as Westlaw, Lexis/Nexis, and familiar with other legal and government resources.
• Experience with educational technology and/or statistical analysis software (like SPSS) is a plus.
• Aptitude for learning new technology. 

 

APPLY NOW

Click the link below to complete an application through the CWSL Career Center website. 

https://workforcenow.adp.com/jobs/apply/posting.html?client=35y2n&ccId=19000101_000001&type=MP&lang=en_US

Application review will begin immediately and will continue until the position is filled.

Purposeful Connections

According to a recent article, research suggests that changing the way curriculum is presented and taught can improve retention of underrepresented minorities in STEM programs. Berman, Jillian, How to Get More Women Into Technology: A Number of Programs Have Tried to Steer Women Into Step--Here's What Works, WSJ (Jun 1, 2021)

The article focused on a number of programs within the STEM fields in trying to increase representation and graduation in STEM majors of women and underrepresented minorities.  The overall trends are not promising.  For example, the percentage of women earning computer science degrees has decreased in the 20 year period from 1998 to 2018, and the percentage of Black women earning computer science or engineering degreee has likewise decreased during the same time period 1998 to 2018.  Nevertheless, one comment in particular caught my eye and it has nothing to do with programs but with a person - a person making a difference.

In the article, Dr. Cara Gomally laments that courses, particularly introductory biology courses, are often taught as a "march through content with no connection of why you should care."  Id.  Sounds a bit like some introductory law school courses to me.  

That lack of connection, of a nexus to purpose, the article suggests, leaves some people behind, particularly in the STEM fields.  To remedy the deficit, Dr. Gomally is designing curriculum to focus not just on content but on the broader connections and uses one can make with the content, such as exploring questions with students as to how antidepressants work or whether students should participate in genetic testing.  Id.  

Those sorts of "why-questions" are filled with life; they create space for people to see how what they are learning can make an impact for them and for their communities and the world at large.  It's in those opportunities in exploring the why of what we are learning that we start to see ourselves, as I understand the article, as valuable participants in the enterprise of, in this case, science.  Id.

This summer, we are working with a number of recent law school graduates preparing for next month's bar exams who, for the most part, will not practice constitutional litigation or contract law or the law of future interests or defensible fees.  Consequently, much of bar prep seems like rote memory and regurgitation, without making connections or exploring meanings to something greater than the mere content and skills in which they are tested by bar examiners.  

To the extent that our graduates fail to make such connections with what they are learning to their future lives as legal practitioners, I think we are doing a disservice to them.  Because many of our graduates want to practice immigration law, I like to explore connections to the word of immigration law within the midst of the bar exam content and skills.  Let me share a few examples.  

First, take the definition of a refugee - one who has a well-founded fear of persecution based on a protected characteristic with the government unable or unwilling to protect them.  

That sounds a lot like a type of tort, perhaps both an intention tort and also a bit like negligence with the state unable or unwilling to protect the person fleeing persecution.

Second, take an article this week from the southern border about the U.S. government's decision to ask non-governmental organizations (NGO's) to designate some asylum applicants as especially vulnerable and therefore eligible to enter the U.S. to proceed with their asylum claims while leaving others behind.

That raises at least two constitutional issues, both of which are tested by bar examiners. First, there's a question as to whether vulnerability determinations by the NGO's constitute state action.  Second, there's a question as to whether vulnerability classifications used by individual NGO's violate the equal protection principle.  That's just getting started.  What about procedural due process and substantive due process considerations?  

Recently, I talked with a graduate, heading into criminal defense work as a public defender, who shared that they were not doing very well on contracts multiple-choice questions.  As to why, the content just didn't excite the person; it seemed irrelevant - totally unconnected - to their future practice as criminal defense counsel.  

In reflection, I asked whether there might be any connections b between contracts and the person's future work as a public defender.  It's just a hunch, we surmised, but we suspected that guilty pleas are contracts, which would ostensibly be governed by common law contract principles, such that if  a government withheld exculpatory evidence, that would not only be a constitutional violation but also a contract defense of unconscionability.  

To cut to the chase, the graduate said that in some ways contract law might actually reinforce the person's future clients' constitutional protections.  

In short, there can sometimes be more to the content than just mere rote learning.  Perhaps one day, somehow and someway, something from bar prep will lead to a new way of looking at how the law applies, really applies, to best protect rights and freedoms. And, in the course of exploring those possible connections with our students and graduates today, we might just be able to help them see that they belong in the legal field, that their experiences count, that they have more than what it takes to be attorneys. (Scott Johns).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What if I'm "Behind" in Bar Review (and Thank you AccessLex)

Today AccessLex put on a great webinar, as part of their AccessLex Summer Webinar Series, about Bar Success. Sara Berman, of AccessLex, moderated a fantastic panel about bar success and early intervention. Some panelists included Afton Cavanaugh of St. Mary’s and Nicole Lefton of Hofstra.

Nicole mentioned that she found, in her data, that students that completed at least 80% of the bar prep program each week were most successful, and passed at a much higher rate. This has been consistent with my findings as well. This came right on the heels of seeing an email in the Academic Support Google group about “catching up” in bar review, and how to advise students. I’m also constantly seeing students on twitter ask about how much of bar prep they REALLY need to complete.

So here is my advice. To my colleagues AND to students. First and foremost, I absolutely agree that the greater percentage of your BarBri/Themis/Kaplan course that you complete, the better. The more you completely, the more likely you are to pass. But students are not statistics, and everyone is a bit different. Afton even ended his presentation with the hope that we remember that they are human beings that sit across from us, not data points. This is absolutely true! It should also be noted that there are always variations in this data. But, we ALL agree that practice makes progress. Not PERFECT – there is no perfect, and you don’t need perfect. But practice does make PROGRESS.  So having said this, how do you “catch up?”

First, stop thinning of it as “catching up” and realize that it’s about making progress. Nicole mentioned that it wasn’t just 80% that did the trick, but rather a CONSTANT 80% over the weeks. So, no cramming at the end!  But don’t give yourself the pressure of “catching up “ – work forward and do what you can!

Second, prioritize practice. Practice essays. Practice MBE. Practice MPT. Make sure you are doing something active. Yes, you need to learn the law – so videos, and taking notes, IS important – but you should really make active practice your number 1 priority. This means making perfect flashcards, or outlines, or “reviewing” premade outlines over and over again, are not as effective as writing essays. I even suggest that you write some essays as open note, because THAT is active review. You ca also turn multiple choice questions into “mini essays” by taking off the answer choices, and writing a paragraph long “essay.” Do this with open notes and it will help you remember the law, work on your essay skills, AND help you with multiple choice questions in general. So, even though they aren’t “assigned”, they are a great way to review law in an active way.

As a side note, there were fantastic conversations about how we, as various schools, can work together. Obviously this sometimes creates various challenges, but there are things we can do, especially in regards to advocacy.

(Melissa Hale)

Gradual Improvement

This is the time in bar prep when everyone emails me that their MBE scores are too low, and they aren't seeing enough improvement.  I completely understand the feeling.  In my early ASP days, I tried to create small gradual goals for all my students after a diagnostic test.  The problem was no one followed the gradual improvement track because that isn't how improvement works.  I love the image posted below.  I saw it on facebook a while ago and found it again in google images.

Don't fret if you aren't seeing the improvement you want.  Questions get harder as you go.  Bar prep companies test different subtopics, so you probably did learn something from the last set of questions.  The next set was on something different.  Improvement happens in the end.  You may not see it fast enough, but you are learning.  Keep up the good work.

(Steven Foster)

ASP Writer's Block Starts Again Monday!

By popular demand, the ASP Writers’ Blocks will return Monday, June 14^th at 11 am est/8 pst.

As a reminder: we work independently in one another’s company for 2 pomodoro cycles (25 minutes each), then briefly share what we are working on and solicit any feedback needed from our colleagues. Thus meetings usually last for about an hour and 20 minutes, though everyone is welcome to join in whatever portion they can attend.

We will regather about every 2 weeks for the next few months, and decide later whether to continue through August.

Upcoming dates will be: June 28, July 19, August 2.

The zoom link is in the google group.

 

Academic and Bar Support Scholarship Spotlight

1.  Cayley Balser, Heidi Burross, Matt Charles, Katherine Cheng, Adriana Cimetta, Jessica Findley, Ran Li, Christopher T. Robertson (Arizona), JD-Next:  A Valid and Reliable Tool to Predict Diverse Students’ Success in Law School.  

From the abstract:

As one of two companion articles, this report tests the validity and reliability of a 2019 pilot test of the exam developed as the precursor to the JD-Next program: a fully-online, non-credit, 7.5-week course to train potential JD students in case reading and analysis skills, prior to their first year of law school. We recruited a national sample of potential JD students, enriched for racial/ethnic diversity, and randomized them to the course or an active placebo (consisting of television shows). We also recruited a sample of volunteers at one particular university who self-selected into the course. All participants (treatment and placebo) took a multiple-choice and essay exam, graded with a standardized methodology. We found that the course exam was a valid and reliable predictor of law school performance, comparable to other standardized tests frequently used for law school admissions. In a companion article, we report on the efficacy of the course for preparing students for law school.

2.  Cayley Balser, Heidi Burross, Matt Charles, Katherine Cheng, Adriana Cimetta, Jessica Findley, Ran Li, Christopher T. Robertson (Arizona), JD-Next: A Randomized Experiment of an Online Scalable Program to Prepare Diverse Students for Law School. 

From the abstract:

We sought to expose diverse potential law students to the methods of JD education and to prepare them for success in law school. This paper reports on the efficacy of the 2019 pilot test of the precursor to the JD-Next program: a fully-online, non-credit, 7.5-week course to train potential JD students in case reading and analysis skills, prior to their first year of law school. We recruited a national sample of potential JD students, enriched for racial/ethnic diversity so that less than half were White non-Hispanics, and randomized them to the course or an active placebo control group (where participants watched legal television shows). We also recruited a sample of volunteers at one university who self-selected into the course and who were propensity score-matched to non-participants, using university archival data. We found that participating in the course is associated with substantial improvement in grades for the targeted 1L course (Contracts) and overall first semester 1L GPA. We also report substantial student confidence gains and satisfaction with the course, in qualitative and quantitative terms, based on a survey at three points in time (pre-course, post-course, and post-semester). In a companion article, we report on the validity and reliability of the JD-Next exam for use in law school admissions.

3.  Susan A. Bandes (DePaul), Feeling and Thinking Like a Lawyer: Cognition, Emotion, and the Practice and Progress of Law, 89 Fordham L. Rev. 1 (2021).

From the abstract:

Generations of lawyers have been taught that thinking like a lawyer requires putting emotion aside. They are warned, for example, that anger will blind them to the facts as they really are. Yet cognitive science rejects the notion that emotion and reason are autonomous, warring spheres. Recently there has been increasing recognition of the harmful consequences of the narrow conception of “thinking like a lawyer” to lawyers’ well-being, but these consequences are generally portrayed as a necessary trade-off between the well-being of lawyers and the preservation of analytical rigor. This Essay will argue that the harm the narrow conception of “thinking like a lawyer” poses to lawyers’ well-being is not simply an ancillary issue or an unfortunate but necessary collateral consequence of engaging in rigorous, logical thinking. A conception of law that attempts to cordon off emotion is poorly suited to the complexities of legal practice and is inconsistent with modern knowledge about how legal, ethical, and moral reasoning—and indeed, legal change and reform—actually occur. This Essay will focus in particular on the emotion of anger and the consequences of attempting to banish it from the realm of legal reasoning.

(Louis Schulze, FIU Law)

Virtual Book Conference

You are invited to a virtual book conference—Law Teaching Strategies for a New Era: Beyond the Physical Classroom—on July 22, 2021 from 11 am EDT to 5:30 pm. You can register for the conference here: http://events.constantcontact.com/register/event?llr=y6oeipdab&oeidk=a07ehz3lyg07d8392cb. You can read more about the book here. 

The abrupt move to online legal education in Spring 2020 accelerated the move to online legal education that has been slowing gathering steam in recent years. As more institutions consider the potential to expand their reach with online courses and programs, law professors must move past “pandemic teaching” and seriously consider how they can create and deliver quality legal education online. Law Teaching Strategies for a New Era: Beyond the Physical Classroom, the first comprehensive book on online legal education, explores techniques, tools, and strategies that can assist all types of law professors in that endeavor.  

The conference will feature five panels that explore the future of the legal profession and offer practical tips on creating effective online courses: 

• Panel 1—The Future of Law Practice:  Moderated by noted legal blogger David Lat, this panel will feature practitioners and judges discussing the future of virtual law practice.
• Panel 2—Becoming the Law School of the Future:  This panel will discuss how law schools can prepare for long-term online learning.
• Panel 3—Designing the Law Courses of the Future: This panel will offer attendees practical tips for designing courses for online delivery.
• Panel 4—The 1L & Doctrinal Curriculum in a New Era: This panel will offer tips from professors who successfully converted their 1L and large doctrinal classes to an online platform.
• Panel 5—The Upper-level Curriculum in a New Era:  This panel will offer tips from professors who successfully converted their experiential classes to an online platform.

Please feel free to reach out to Tessa Dysart ([email protected]) or Tracy Norton ([email protected]) with any questions! 

Pandemic Conversations & Cognitive Overload

As Professor Elizabeth Stillman comments in an excellent blog post entitled "Jazz Hands," we've been making the best in the midst of the pandemic in learning to engage in "pandemic teaching." E. Stillman, "Jazz Hands," (May 17, 2021).t.

That made me think about our pandemic conversations, which so many of us have hosted, shared, and participated in through Skype and zoom and other technological mediums of expression.  

It's brought us together but at what cost, if any?

Well, according to an article by writer Joanna Stern, there can be a lot at stake in making the choice as to the method of communication that we use with others.  Unfortunately, Stern suggests, we too often turn - too quickly - to zoom and other such innovations without realizing the cognitive loads that visual chats can impose upon us all.  J. Stern, "Stop with the Video Chats Already. Just Make a Voice Call," WSJ (May 26, 2021)

Here's an except that nicely summarizes research about video communications and cognitive load:

"Géraldine Fauville, an assistant professor at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden and the lead researcher on that aforementioned study, mapped out the main reasons video can be so cognitively draining:

• It’s a lot of looking at ourselves, which is unnatural and comes with self-evaluation and scrutiny. Called the mirror effect, this can be particularly intense for women. You can combat this with the self-hide option available in Zoom and Google Meet. Google has just added a number of features to address this specifically. Microsoft Teams’ new Together Mode was built to combat this, too.

• It’s a lot of close-up eye contact. In fact, the brain processes that sort of invasion of space as if it should lead to mating or fighting.

• It’s a lot of sitting and feeling trapped. You can’t get up and walk around during a video call.

• It’s a lot of nodding. 'For you to communicate cues to the participant, you need to intensify the cues," Dr. Fauville said. “So people nod more vigorously than if they were in the same room.'"

(underlined links and text in original)."

In other words, we might be asking more of ourselves, our colleagues, and our students that we ought when we default to zoom rather than in-person conversations, emails, or other forms of communication.  So, if I had to summarize what I've learned, choose wisely, both for myself and for my partners in communication.  (Scott Johns).

Introducing the 2021-2022 AASE Executive Board!

It was great to see so many of you at the 8th Annual AASE Conference. I'd like to thank Joni Wiredu, and her team at American University Washington College of Law, as well as Afton Cavanaugh, for putting together such an amazing conference! They even made sure we had fantastic virtual socializing opportunities. 

I'd also like to thank our executive board members that ended their term last week - Twinette Johnson, Goldie Pritchard, Joni Wiredu, and Antonia Miceli - they are currently working hard to help transition the new board members, and they will be missed. 

And now, it's time to introduce the 2021-2022 AASE Executive Board

DeShun Harris, Past President

Britany Raposa, President Elect

Yolonda Sewell, Vice President of Diversity

Paulina Davis, Secretary

Laura Mott, Treasurer

Megan Kreminski, Treasurer Elect

Afton Cavanaugh, Host School Representative 

I look forward to working with this fantastic team!

(Melissa Hale, AASE President)