Law School Academic Support Blog

WCCASP Save the Date

Director of Academic Support at McGeorge

Dean Michael Hunter Schwartz invites you to apply to serve as McGeorge’s next Director of Academic Support.  The Director enjoys faculty status and will hold the title of Professor of Law, Legal Practice, with a rank of assistant, associate, or full professor, commensurate with experience-- and with voting rights (on everything but promotion and tenure for tenure line faculty), faculty governance responsibilities, and sabbatical opportunities. Although not a tenure-track position, the position is designed to lead to a long-term contract that culminates, after five years of meeting standards in terms of teaching, service, and professional development activities, in an indefinite contract with no term limits and with job security similar to a tenured position.

The Director will not have any responsibility for bar pass programming and will get to teach one or more non-academic support courses.  Email Dean Schwartz for more information.

Click here for the official posting.

Unmasking

Since classes started last week, we have had a lot of chatter on our faculty list-serv about teaching while masked. Last year, most faculty members taught unmasked from home, so this is new for them. Yes, your mask gets gross after about thirty minutes and, also, yes, it is hard to be understood and understand students when everyone is masked. Yet, it is nice to be back in a classroom and feel that energy even when I am not sure I could pick my students out in a line-up. I was contemplating a blog entry about the best masks for teaching or learning in classes that are longer than one hour-but I am still doing that research[1].

But what about the other masks that we are all wearing in class? The ones that do not obscure our noses and mouths, but rather the ones that obscure how we feel or our point of view? I am usually concerned about the things I can’t see about students even when their faces are visible to me. I know that my students on academic warning are multi-faceted and that they find themselves on academic warning[2] for a number of reasons-many of which many not be academic. I want to see them regardless of how we are conducting classes.

So, I asked them to show me who they are behind the mask. I didn’t have anyone unmask in the classroom, but the first request for the class was to take a survey (not an assignment because I was asking some questions that might be considered more personal than students are comfortable answering). I had started doing this last fall during remote teaching to ascertain technology and space constraints on the advice of my amazing department chair for my undergraduate classes. I threw in a few fun questions like whether or not talking about the ending of Bridgerton or Wandavision would be a spoiler and which one of my pets they would like to see come to class for a visit (I underestimated the number of guinea pig fans, but she made her cameo nonetheless).

This year’s survey was a little different but began with the usual getting to know you questions like names, what you would like to be called, pronouns etc.. I asked about what they will miss most about remote learning (the commute was the number one answer there, followed closely by snacks). I asked open ended questions about things they think I should know about their learning style and ways we can make our class a community. I asked about what things outside of school might impact their academics and about what skills/knowledge they hoped to leave the class with. I got some very thoughtful and helpful ideas about what I could do to make this a useful class. I know students had to give up another class to take this required class and knowing what students want from it and how they would like it to happen is incredibly valuable information.  This class doesn’t work without buy-in from students, so knowing what they are shopping for is always better.

Finally, I asked about attending the class in-person. It was the last question in the survey. The question prompt was “In person learning is:”. Unlike other multiple-choice questions they will encounter this year (and beyond), there were no wrong answers and you could check as many as applied. The choices I offered were: “Amazing”, “New for Me for Law School”, “Scary”, and “A lot and I am Overwhelmed”.  Out of the twenty students who answered the survey (from a class of 22), 14 said this was new for them, 5 said it was scary, 4 said it was overwhelming and slightly more than half (11) thought it was amazing. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, no one checked just one answer. In retrospect, maybe I should have offered an “All of the Above” option because that is the option I would have chosen.

I still may not be able to recognize everyone when (and if) we unmask at some point, but for now, I see them clearly.

(Liz Stillman)

 

[1] The masks with the clear mouth area creep me out. I get a beginning of Rocky Horror coupled with Pennywise vibe from those, so they will not be appearing on that list.

[2] Intentional use of the passive voice.

Interim Director of Academic Support at Capital Law School

Capital University Law School in Columbus, Ohio, is in need of an Interim Director and Professor of Academic Support for academic year 2020-2021. Experience in this area is preferred. A search for the permanent position will begin shortly, and more information on that search will be forthcoming. Interested parties should contact Reynaldo Valencia, Dean and Professor of Law directly.

Director for Bar Performance and Assessment at GGU

BASIC FUNCTION & SCOPE OF JOB

Under the supervision of the Faculty Director of Bar Services, the Associate Director will design and implement a comprehensive communications and monitoring system to annually track student preparation and performance on the bar exam by graduating class in all jurisdictions, and assume primary responsibility for collecting and analyzing a wide range of bar performance data for reporting to the law school faculty, university senior leadership and accrediting agencies. The Associate Director will also oversee the delivery of the law school’s 3L/4L and post-graduation bar exam preparation curriculum and programming, including but not limited to the alumni bar mentoring program, essay feedback program and simulated exams.  Click here for the posting.

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS:

• Create and implement a comprehensive program for communicating with students about bar exam requirements in order to assess their preparedness and predict success;
• Design and implement a case management and monitoring system for students in each graduating class, to track exam performance in all jurisdictions, with particular focus on the California Bar Exam;
• Collect, compile, manage and secure a wide-range of data that relates student demographics, participation and academic achievement to bar performance outcomes;
• Conduct statistical analysis and prepare reports for the law school faculty and the university senior leadership following each exam administration;
• In collaboration with the law school dean’s office, compile statistics for the ABA’s annual bar passage questionnaire; recommend strategies to maintain compliance with accreditation standards;
• Oversee and provide individualized counseling to GGU students preparing for the bar exam as well as repeat bar takers;
• Review student practice essays, provide detailed feedback and oversee the law school’s alumni bar mentoring program;
• Formulate and revise as needed the curriculum for bar preparation workshops, courses and orientation sessions;
• Provide training for adjunct instructors and supervise teaching assistants;
• In collaboration with the Faculty Director of Academic Achievement, administer all Themis programs and services throughout the student lifecycle; and,
• Provide support for Academic Achievement programming and teach academic skills courses as needed.

QUALIFICATIONS:

• JD from an ABA-accredited law school and member of the State Bar of California;
• Minimum two years’ experience in preparing students for the bar exam, with prior experience grading the California bar exam preferred;
• Experience with standard practices of data collection, management and analysis; familiarity working with relational database systems and statistical program software packages preferred;
• Proficiency in using Excel and the MS Office suite;
• Superior organizational, written, oral, and interpersonal communication skills;
• Ability to provide motivation and encouragement to students; think creatively and critically around strategies to assess student preparedness and improve bar exam performance;
• Ability to work independently, managing multiple projects and deadlines under minimal supervision; set priorities, demonstrate initiative and assume leadership while working as a member of a professional team;
• Ability to handle confidential information, collaborate with colleagues, and exhibit good judgment when interfacing with students, staff and faculty; and
• Ability to establish and maintain positive and professional working relationships with all law school constituents, bar examination officials and the legal community.

Think Like A Lawyer - An Overused and Misused Expression?

I hesitate to admit this: I've used this phrase so many times that it just sort of swims to the surface and color almost all that I do to include how I approach my work as an academic support educator.  However, as Professors Kris Franklin and Rory Bahadur remind us in a recent publication, this phrase is relatively meaningless as to the real purposes behind legal education. Directed Questions: A Non-Socratic Dialogue about Non-Socratic Teaching (Aug. 16, 2021).

And, I might add a bit dangerous in the sense of destructive of learning...

Here's why:

First, notice the word "a".  

That doesn't seem to leave much room for differences among our future lawyers.  Rather, it seems to suggest that there is only one type of lawyer.  Exclusive.  Not part of broader society.  One type of which I must be trained to think like.  It leaves out the "me" in lawyering.  In short, it suggests that unless I give up what is really me and become someone else, this mythical lawyer, I will not succeed; I will not belong; I will not think like a lawyer.

Second, notice the word "think".  

I do a lot of thinking, well, mostly day dreaming.  Much of my thinking is not productive.  Why not? Because I don't act upon it.  It just remains hidden from action, in my mind, silently powerless.  In fact, by suggesting that we are going to train our students to "think" like a lawyer, we are really leading them astray, because law is much more than just thinking. It also requires communication, it requires action, it requires practice, it requires leaning in and giving up of yourself for representation and betterment of others.  And, if truth be told, it requires a lot of writing, too.

Third, sticking with the word "think".

Of course, learning requires thinking, much thinking, deep thinking.  But learning takes much more than thinking because we learn through what we experience, what we try, what we fail in and what we succeed in, and how we learn to overcome and improve through and with our learning experiences.  In short, the phrase sells learning short.  It suggests that we can think our ways into being lawyers.  Like the practice of law, learning requires lots of practice too, lots of action too.

I'm not sure what should replace this phrase.  But maybe it's a lot more showing what it is like to be and serve and work and counsel and act as lawyers.  As a starting point, I just wrote our faculty and staff and suggested that they bring some of their former students, who just graduated and took the bar exam recently, back to their classrooms, their programs, and their offices to talk about how they learned in law school and what they are learning now.  In other words, there's lots of room for lots of different lawyers with lots of different ways to practice.  Letting our students know that they are allowed to be who they are and that there's room for them just as they are might just go along way to helping our students thrive as they begin the fall studies.

(Scott Johns).

Two ASP Professors cited in recent ABA Journal Article

Two ASP Professors Marsha Griggs (Washburn Law) and Melissa Hale (Loyola University Chicago School of Law) are cited in an American Bar Association article detailing technical difficulties experienced by some remote bar exam takers with the July 2021 bar exam.  

In my opinion, these sorts of problems demonstrate - for far too long - that regulators and courts are too reluctant, insular, and wedded to a one-sized fits all approach as the only method to determine whether law school graduates are competent to practice law.  It's like trying to fly an airplane regardless of the storm clouds and turbulence ahead.  Our future graduates and our future communities deserve better.  

For the article, please see the following link. :https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/technical-problems-again-plague-remote-bar-examinees-who-blame-software-provider.

(Scott Johns)

Academic and Bar Support Scholarship Spotlight

A great deal of scholarship to share since the blog's bar exam break:

1.  Jennifer A. Gundlach (Hofstra Law) & Jessica Santangelo (Hofstra University), Understanding the Metacognitive "Space" and Its Implications for Law Students' Learning.

From the abstract:

This article builds upon our prior work, contributing to the growing literature addressing development of metacognitive skills in law students. Metacognitive skills include knowledge of strategies that impact thinking and learning, and regulation of thinking and learning related to specific learning tasks. Metacognitive skills are important for learning in law school as well as for successful lawyering.

Herein we describe an empirical study of first-year law students that addresses four primary research questions: (1) What level of metacognitive knowledge and regulation do law students demonstrate when they enter law school? (2) Do law students’ metacognitive knowledge and regulation change during the first semester of law school? (3) Is there a relationship between law students’ academic performance and metacognitive knowledge and regulation? (4) Does instructional intervention impact law students’ metacognitive knowledge and regulation?

We found that most students enter law school lacking metacognitive knowledge but with some metacognitive regulation skills. The majority of students ended their first semester with knowledge. However, metacognitive knowledge was not associated with course performance nor was there an effect of instructional intervention on metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive regulation, specifically use of strategies identified as most effective in law school, was associated with course performance, as was overall level of metacognitive regulation. While there was no effect of instructional intervention on the level of metacognitive regulation, intervention did result in more students reporting use of strategies such as fact patterns, hypotheticals, and working practice problems, strategies supporting both success in law school and successful lawyering.

 

2.  Rory Bahadur (Washburn) & Kris Franklin (New York Law School),  Directed Question:  A Non-Socratic Dialogue about Non-Socratic Teaching.

From the abstract:

Legal pedagogy can change for the better.

Despite frequent criticism of Socratic and case-method teaching, the core teaching in most foundational law classes has been remarkably stagnant. But in a time of turmoil and reexamination of the traditions we have all inherited, there is also opportunity for meaningful adaptation to the modern era.

This Article introduces Directed Questions methodology as an alternative to the traditional teaching models currently operating in most law schools. Directed reading pedagogy allows legal educators to seamlessly transition to a modern and effective pedagogy incorporating best practices which recognizes that fostering inclusion and the success of diverse students is mandatory in post-Langdellian legal education. The Article takes the form of an extended discourse between two experienced legal educators, and in that way simultaneously explains and partially exemplifies the Directed Questions learning method.

(Louis Schulze, FIU Law)

 

 

Welcome Liz Stillman

As we enter another year, we are adding to our editors!  Liz Stillman did a great job writing a few guest pieces last year, so she is going to write every week this year.  She will post on Sundays, so her insights will be waiting for you Monday morning.  Let's all welcome Liz.  I posted her bio below, and she is posting her first piece today.

Bio: 

Liz Stillman is an Associate Professor in Suffolk University Law School's Academic Support Program. She was previously an Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of New York where she prosecuted juvenile delinquency cases in Queens and Manhattan Family Courts. She also teaches in the Political Science and Legal Studies Department for the Suffolk University College of Arts and Sciences as well as in the accelerated and LL.M. programs at the Law School. She is an appointed Commissioner on the Brookline Commission for Women, as well as a board member and legal advisor for the Animal Rescue Front. She is a Suffolk University Ambassador for Inclusion and certified in English as a Method of Instruction (EMI). Liz is also the immediate past president of the New England Consortium of Academic Support Professionals.

 

Canary in a Coal Mine

It was fall 1980-something and I had just purchased an album that I was certain was going to change my world (spoiler: it did a little): Zenyatta Mondatta by The Police. I felt very hip catching the reference to Lolita in Don’t Stand So Close to Me and hummed Do do do do all around J.H.S. 141[1] where, sadly, none of my teachers reminded me of Sting. But there was another catchy little song on that album that was an earworm for us: Canary in a Coal Mine. In the song, someone is accused of being so overly cautious that they are not really living their life in a meaningful way. It was a song in favor of YOLO before YOLO was a thing. But if you were a canary living in a coal mine, you were being the opposite of cautious-you were essentially putting yourself on the line to be a warning to others coming after you.

In reality, until 1986, canaries were used to detect the presence of carbon monoxide (or other toxic gasses) in coal mines[2]. The idea was that because canaries were sensitive to airborne toxins, if the canary got sick or died then the miners knew to vacate immediately. While the carbon monoxide detector in my house isn’t nearly as cute, it also doesn’t need to die to let me know if trouble is brewing.

I think I know how the (real, not song) canary felt.  Last week, I taught in-person (everyone masked) in a room with about 100 people for hours of orientation. I also oriented a smaller group of students in an equally full and smaller room for a bunch more hours between those sessions. Each room was at its intended pre-pandemic capacity. The second room had been the COVID testing site in our building last year. Everyone in both rooms had been cleared as vaccinated or having a good reason why they were not. And yet, I was, and am, frightened that I may have been the canary in the coal mine.

As Academic Support professionals, at least at my school, we are the first line of academic related teaching most students encounter. We teach the court system, case briefing, reading, IRAC and a host of other things before classes begin and even do an early assessment to see students’ baselines when they come to law school. Doctrinal professors and legal writing faculty do not usually teach during orientation. So, if anything was going to go wrong in the midst of this new surge in COVID, ASP faculty[3] would be the harbingers of that bad news.

Here’s the rub though, ASP faculty tend to be non-tenured, non-tenure track and at best, may have presumptively renewable contracts. We are more often women. We have no power to turn down this orientation assignment-we do not volunteer as tribute, we are scheduled to be there. Don’t get me wrong: I do not, for even a minute, think that my institution was intentionally using us as canaries and perhaps the power dynamic is more nuanced than I see it, but I just felt we had no real power to refuse without some consequences to our job security. Everyone else standing in front of the crowd had a different status than we did. They were not asking academic support faculty to do anything they weren’t willing to do themselves. They are compensated accordingly.

In all honestly, I’m not even sure I would have refused given the option, because it was exhilarating teaching in person to a big crowd again. Even masked, the energy of live teaching is irrefutable. It was  liberating to use my whole body to teach. Truly. Yet, today, six days later, I am wishing that the testing room was still open, not because I don’t feel well, but because I would like to be officially told that I am well. I wish (gratuitous Police reference) people had not stood so close to me.

The fact that canaries were used in coal mines until 1986 was surprising to me-I was almost certain that the practice had died out at least a hundred years before that, but I am pretty sure that if mining companies had caged miners and used them as a warning system for toxic gasses back in the day, mine safety would have been far better, far sooner.

(Liz Stillman)

 

[1] New York City elementary and middle schools have numbers, not names. Yes, my kids think that is hilarious.

[2] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/story-real-canary-coal-mine-180961570/.

[3] And our amazing Deans and Associate Deans.

Using YOUR Senses to Make Sense of Cases

In follow-up to Professor Victoria McCoy Dunkley's outstanding blog post entitled "Be in Your Bag (of Questions) as a 1L Reader," here's some thoughts about how you might use your senses to help make sense of the cases that you are assigned for class reading: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/academic_support/2021/08/be-in-your-bag-of-questions-as-a-1l-reader.html

But first a story...

I've been doing a lot of walking.  In fact, I've walked about 380 miles from Denver to Durango on the Colorado Trail (I still have about 120 miles to go of high altitude terrain).  As a person who fractured my back two summers ago in a car accident, I'm a slow mover and that's okay.

You see, as Professor Denise DeForest at Colorado Law quips, when you find yourself lost, "slow down, stop, and sit on a log."  I love logs, rocks, and boulders.  My favorite time on the trail is resting.  But, as I sit on a log recuperating, my senses come alive.  I start to hear buzzing.  I spot all kinds and manners of activity that I missed while hiking, like the scurry of ants preparing for the fall mountaintop snow storms.  My hands feel the bark of the downed log that has become my lounging spot.  In short, just because I stopped doesn't mean that I stopped learning and experiencing. Rather, by slowing down and stopping, I saw more than I did while moving.

There's a lot to be gleaned from these sorts of experiences.  Most of our lives, let's be honest, are lived in haste.  As though there's no time to waste.  But critical reading takes pondering time; it takes using your senses to experience what the parties might have felt like when they litigated the case that you are reading, what they might have exclaimed or cursed when the decision came out, how the court might have explored and explained how they viewed the case and the facts.  

So, in follow-up to yesterday's excellent blog post on 1L reading, feel free to journey through and with the cases.  Situation yourself in them.  Be expressive, feel free to be combatant and skeptical, let yourself run wild, so to speak, as you give voice to what you are seeing, as you learn and question and interpret what you are reading.  That's learning.  In other words, it's going to take time.  But it is not wasted time at all.  

That being said, I spent all of first-year of law school super-afraid (really most of law school) because I'm not good speaker or a reader (I was a mathematician in college).  And, the gold lettering on most of the case books - with lots of red and black - psyched me out.  

But not all that is gold glitters.  Much of what you read is, well, not very well-written or good or even just.  So take aim at it.  Don't let the cases fool you.  You belong in law school, which means that your voice and life counts.  Share it with others.  And, as you journey through reading, let me know what you are learning. I'd love to hear from you!  (Scott Johns).

Be In Your Bag (of Questions) as a 1L Reader

As highlighted by last week's post from Scott Johns, critical legal reading is a skill that you can develop with practice and intentionality. To become an expert reader, however, you will need to model what expert readers do when reading a legal opinion. This means moving beyond default reading strategies, such as highlighting and underlining, and reaching into your bag of questions to situate the case, identify its most important parts, and understand the opinion and its relevance to various hypothetical situations. Here are a few tips for reading and examples of the kinds of questions you should ask while reading . . . 

• Situate yourself. Consider why your professor assigned the case and how/where the case fits with other cases you have read thus far. For instance, if this is the fourth case you have read regarding duty, what does this case tell you about the concept of duty that the first three cases did not? Also, use the information contained in the case caption:
• Is this a state or federal case?
• Where in the judicial hierarchy does the deciding court fit (e.g., trial court)?
• Who are the parties?
• What year was the case decided (and how might that affect the weight you should assign to the decision)?
• What was the disposition (e.g., affirmed, reversed)? Knowing this information at the outset informs your reading of the case. 

• Read with purpose and a critical eye. Wear multiple hats as you are reading and consider what you might argue and how you would respond to any counterarguments. What is the plaintiff/appellant/appellee’s position? As that party’s counsel, would you have set forth the same arguments? Why or why not? How would you counter the other party’s legal position? Ask yourself the same questions as counsel for the defendant/appellant/appellee. In addition, put yourself in the decision maker’s shoes. If you were the decision maker in the case, would you have taken the same pathway to reach a decision? What, if anything, might you have done differently (e.g., assigned more/less weight to an argument by one of the parties)? Would you have decided the case the same way? Why or why not? As you look at the case from these varying perspectives, be sure to define any unknown legal terms, phrases, and/or abbreviations along the way—learn to speak the language!

• Identify and have a strong command of the relevant facts. There are two types of facts: procedural and substantive. Take note of how the case arrived at the court now charged with rendering a decision. Slow down and digest the substantive facts of the case. As you read the opinion, sift through the facts for those that are relevant (i.e., identify the facts that trigger application of the rule and are relied upon by the court in its reasoning). How will your professor test your knowledge of the course at the end of the semester? Likely via a series of fact patterns. Thus, you must be skilled at recognizing the kinds of facts that trigger a given issue and, thereby, the application of a specific rule or set of rules. Close reading of the facts will also help you synthesize the course material and reconcile cases with different outcomes. NOTE: this does not mean that you need a long factual narrative in your case briefs (you need only the relevant facts).

• Identify the issues before the court. What question (or questions) is the court trying to answer? Are the issues before the court substantive, procedural, or both?

• Pay close attention to the court’s reasoning. How did the court reach its decision? Did it rely on the Constitution, a statute, a rule, case law, the language of an agreement between the parties, etc.? How did the court use/interpret them (e.g., analogical reasoning, rule-based reasoning, plain meaning, legislative history)? If the court relied on cases, how did the court distinguish any relevant cases with different outcomes? Did the court explicitly discuss policy considerations (for the existence of the rule, the functioning of the rule, the outcome of the case, etc.)?

• Identify the relevant rule of law. What rule do you get from the case? Is the case providing the rule/rule elements? Is it explaining one or more rule elements? Does it illustrate an exception to the rule? Consider how/where the rule from the case would fit into your legal analysis in a question testing the relevant issue (e.g., duty).

• Consider the breadth of the court's holding. How broad or narrow is the court's holding? How might the holding be applied more broadly? How might the holding be applied more narrowly? 

(Victoria McCoy Dunkley)

Bar Preparation Position at University of Houston

The University of Houston Law Center is seeking applicants for two Clinical Professorship positions - one in legal writing (Legal Skills and Strategies, or LSS), and one in our bar preparation program.  Interested candidates should both formally apply using the links below and send Emily Berman, the chair of UHLC’s faculty appointments committee, a current CV or resume along with a brief email expressing interest at [email protected].  In the subject line of the email, please indicate which position(s) you are applying for.  

• LSS:  Clinical Assistant/Assoc Professor-LSS Posting-FAC00185
• Bar Prep:  Clinical Assistant Professor-Bar Prep-FAC001854

Associate Director for Academic Excellence at University of Oregon

Associate Director for Academic Excellence

Job no: 527839

Posting Link:  https://careers.uoregon.edu/en-us/job/527839/associate-director-for-academic-excellence

Work type: Faculty - Career
Location: Eugene, OR
Categories: Administrative/Professional, Legal/Law

Department: School of Law
Rank: Lecturer
Annual Basis: 12 Month
Salary: $90,000 - $100,000 per year

Review of Applications Begins
September 1, 2021; position open until filled

Special Instructions to Applicants
Along with your online application including three references, please upload:
• A cover letter which includes subject matter interests
• A current resume
• A statement addressing your potential contribution(s) to diversity, equity, and inclusion (see below)

As part of the application process, applicants are required to submit a statement about promoting equity, inclusion, and diversity in their professional careers. In evaluating such statements, the law school will consider awareness of inequities and challenges faced by underrepresented minority students and faculty; track record (commensurate to career stage) of activities that reduce barriers in education or research for underrepresented minority students and faculty; vision and plans for how their work will continue to contribute to UO’s mission to serve the needs of our diverse state and student population and create an inclusive campus; and other relevant factors.

Department Summary
The University of Oregon School of Law is a dynamic, ABA-accredited law school and Oregon’s only public law school. Degrees offered include: Juris Doctor (JD), Master of Laws (LLM), Master of Conflict and Dispute Resolution (CRES), and a minor in undergraduate legal studies. Oregon Law’s mission is to provide a world-class education. We prepare students through excellent classroom teaching paired with a multitude of practical experience opportunities and robust professional development. Our faculty produce exceptional research and scholarship. We accomplish our mission in a positive, inclusive environment where we strive to provide everyone opportunities to grow, contribute, and develop. Our aim is to learn, teach, and practice the principles of equity and justice as critical foundations for our overall effort to achieve excellence as a top-ranked law school. Success in this work requires a diverse group of people in various faculty and staff roles working in one of our two locations, Eugene and Portland. The University of Oregon is located within the traditional homelands of the Southern Kalapuya. Learn more about Oregon Law at law.uoregon.edu, and consider joining our team.

Position Summary
Oregon Law’s Academic Excellence Program is dedicated to supporting every JD student’s academic achievement from matriculation through graduation by teaching students to be effective learners and helping them to develop critical thinking and analytical skills. The Associate Director teaches the bar studies classes and provides educational programs to law students to prepare them to gain admission to the bar. The position will be responsible for the bar preparedness efforts of a program that has already developed several classes and strategies to facilitate bar preparedness and will work closely with the Director to enrich and further develop the current program.

The position requires a passion for working with and mentoring students, excellent communication and leadership skills, organizational prowess, initiative, and self-motivation. Considerable judgment and tact are required in handling many diverse students, donors, alumni, distinguished guests, and faculty members to coordinate the smooth execution of the program’s mission and goals.

This is a 1.0 FTE, 12-month, fixed-term, career non-tenure track Lecturer position that reports to the Director of the Academic Excellence Program. There is an expectation that this position will continue beyond one-year based on performance, funding, and need.

Minimum Requirements
• JD from an ABA-accredited law school with a record of academic excellence
• Must have attained a license to practice law (need not be current)

Professional Competencies
• Demonstrated ability to work effectively with students, staff, and faculty from culturally diverse backgrounds and with multiple intersectional identities; and advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in the university community
• Ability to build rapport with students in individual counseling situations and maintain student and student record confidentiality
• Strong oral, written, and interpersonal skills and the ability to work successfully with diverse group of clients, students, and faculty members
• Ability to develop and implement a strategic plan for the bar support arm of the Academic Excellence Program
• Strong organizational, administrative, and supervisory skills
• Proven or potential for teaching success
• Strong problem solving and project management skills with proven ability to strategize and prioritize, to meet goals and deadlines
• Flexibility to adapt and respond as necessary as the Academic Excellence Program develops and grows

Preferred Qualifications
• Prior teaching experience or experience working with graduate students, especially experience working with students on skills and/or bar preparation
• Current license to practice law

Assistant Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs and Loyola Chicago

Loyola University Chicago School of Law is seeking applications for the Assistant Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs. The Assistant Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs (Assistant Director) will work under the supervision of the Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs (Director). Together both parties will manage the day-to-day operations of Loyola Law’s Academic Success and Bar preparation program. The main goal of the Academic Success Program is to develop and deliver programs to promote the academic success of students from matriculation, throughout law school, and as they prepare to enter the legal profession. This includes programming and support for students during pre-orientation, orientation, the three years of law school, and bar prep. The Assistant Director will work under the supervision of the Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs. To apply please send a cover letter and curriculum vitae or resume to Director of Academic Success and Bar Programs, Melissa Hale, at [email protected].

Primary Responsibilities (include but are not limited to):
• Counsel individual students to help them improve study and exam-taking skills, specifically those students who may be at risk. • Assist in overseeing the First Year Academic Tutors
• Assist in developing and teaching academic support program for first year second semester students. • Providing individual academic counseling to all students and alumni preparing for the bar • Researching and implementing the most current best practices for bar preparation • Serving on the Bar Exam Success Committee
• Develop and maintain a high level of knowledge about academic support and bar preparation programs, techniques, and methods.
• Track student success and academic performance for students in academic difficulty and at-risk students.
• Assist with supplemental bar prep program
• Assist with collection and organization of data for long-term assessment of: (a) student participation in Academic and Bar Success programming and course offerings, (b) individual student academic and bar exam performance, and (c) Loyola University Chicago School of Law retention and bar passage rates.
• Perform other duties in support of the Academic and Bar Success program as assigned by the Director

Qualifications:
• Juris Doctor Degree from an ABA-accredited law school; successful passage of a Bar Exam.
• Have been licensed in any state for a minimum of 2-3 years.
• An equivalent combination of education and experience may be substituted.
• Interest in and enthusiasm for helping students build the skills necessary for law school and bar success.
• Individual must be a self-starter and demonstrate a sound work ethic.
• Must be able to function independently with minimal oversight.

Required Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities:
• Intermediate level computer skills, specifically in Microsoft Office Suite, including MS Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint
• Strong legal writing, research, and analysis skills.
• Strong communication and public speaking skills.
• Commitment to fostering a diverse and inclusive community.
• Ability to identify methods to enhance learning for multiple learning styles.
• Demonstrated ability to exercise sound, ethical, and professional judgment.
• Proficient in compiling and analyzing data for statistical analysis.
• Some evening and weekend work necessary based on program and student needs.

LUC is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer with a strong commitment to hiring for our mission and diversifying our faculty. The University seeks to increase the diversity of its faculty, staff and student populations because broad diversity contributes to a robust academic environment and is critical to meeting the University’s commitment to excellence in education, research, educational access and services in an increasingly diverse society. As a Jesuit Catholic institution of higher education, we seek candidates who will contribute to our strategic plan to deliver a transformative education in the Jesuit tradition. Candidates should consult our website at http://www.luc.edu/mission/missionandidentity.shtml to gain a clearer understanding of LUC’s mission. For information about the university’s focus on transformative education, please consult our website at http://www.luc.edu/transformativeed. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment, without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability or veteran status.

A Few Suggestions for 1L Readers

Congratulations as you begin to embark on your legal education as entering first year law students!  It's an exciting time!

But, as others have pointed out, amidst the buzz, there can also be a lot of anxiety.  Stress especially seems to mount at the most inopportune times, like when we've been assigned lots of stiff reading in preparation for our first law school classes.  

So, here's a few suggestions about how to read for classes.  

But first, I have a confession...

I hear voices.  Not all of the time, mind you.  But, definitely at the most inconvenient of times...like when I'm trying to read!  [I think this is called sub-vocalization.]  You see, I can only read as fast as I speak (and I don't tend to speak very fast unless I'm excited or nervous, which I often am, particularly when I'm trying to digest dense legal materials).  

Indeed, I'm not a very good reader.  To be frank, when someone asks me to work with them through a reading passage (whether a case, a statute, a multiple-choice problem or an essay prompt), I really want to go in hiding, into a "sound chamber" so to speak, so that I can read slowly and not so-silently, as I work out the meaning of the text through hearing.  That's because as I hear the words the words become alive, the punctuation marks spring up from the page into my voice, and the paragraph breaks give me a chance to catch my breath and digest what I've just vocalized.   But that takes time.

In short, if you haven't caught the gist of what I am saying, I feel like I am a poor reader because I am a slow reader.

So here's my first tip:  Rushed reading is not reading. To paraphrase Socrate's famous line that the "unexamined life is not worth living," an "unexamined case" is not worth reading.  In other words, in law school, it's not how fast you read but what your learn about the law and legal problem-solving as you read.  To cut to the chase, reading is about examining the cases and the statutes and the legal texts assigned in law school.  It takes lots of time so plan on it.  To put it bluntly, it means "cross-examine" the cases, asking questions, evaluating the arguments and analysis, and then forming your own opinion about those arguments.

Second, don't let the "gold" bindings on the fancy case books and the big name judges that signed the cases intimidate you.  In my opinion, many of the cases in the casebook are just wrong because, to be honest, there's no perfect opinion.  There are always weaknesses.  So be bold and give it your best shot and challenge the opinion.

Third, realize that reading is a skill; it's not something that comes natural to us, especially critical legal reading.  But that's great news because, as a skill, it is something that we can learn to do and learn to do well.  In other words, believe in yourself.

Fourth, don't just dive into the cases. Instead, model what expert readers do prior to reading by engaging in pre-reading strategies.  Take a look at where the case is located in the syllabus and in the casebook table of contents.  Based on that placement, try to predict the purpose behind being assigned to read that case.  Then, get to know the players.  Learn something about the case from the case caption, which might be as simple as the jurisdiction (state or location) in which the dispute took place.  Then skim the case to capture the sorts of sections of the case and how it looks organizationally.  Finally, here's my favorite pre-reading strategy: Peek at the end of the case to see how it comes out.

Fifth, read with your heart.  Recognize that behind each case lies real individuals and organizations with heart-felt disputes that they couldn't resolve without going to court.  Put yourself in the shoes of the parties.  Let the facts as related by the court speak to you.  As you read, look up words that you don't know.  Write the meaning of those words in your own words.  Then feel free to draw lots of pictures and diagrams to help you visualize what is happening. Realize that each case is subject to multiple interpretations so you have much more freedom than you might think at first to really dialogue with the text.  Indeed, try to catch mistakes by the court.  Talk back to the court and with the court as you read the opinions.

Finally, realize that reading doesn't stop after you read.  Instead, after reading, be an explorer to construct your own meaning of the case.  As a suggestion, compile a list of questions that you would like to have asked the court or the advocates.  Or, summarize in your own words what you think the case stands for (and why it was assigned for your course).  Or, evaluate the case as to whether its reasoning was puzzling, or startling, or settling (and why).  Or, conjure up different facts to test how the decision might have been impacted in different circumstances.  Then, to wrap up, synthesis a one sentence statement or phrase for what you've learned from the case, such as: "Vosburg (involving a schoolhouse kick) stands for the proposition that people are liable for battery even when they don't intend to harm anyone as long as they intended the contact because the purpose of battery is to protect people from - not just harmful contacts - but from all contacts that interfere with another's bodily integrity as a co-human being."

Before I let you go, let me say a word about speed.  

You don't get faster at reading cases by trying to read fast.  

Rather, over time, much like water as it heats slowly on the oven range, using these strategies won't feel like much of an improvement...at all.  Instead, if  you're like me, you'll feel like it's taking a lot more time, energy, and perspiration to learn to be a critical legal reader.   And, it is!  

But, by going slow, conversationally with the text, through practice in pre-reading strategies, then reading the text with robust gusto, and finally polishing off the reading by making sense and connections with the text for future use, you'll end up becoming a faster reader without even trying.  Indeed, much like learning to ride a bike, you'll surely fall lots and get bruises along the way.  That's okay because learning is difficult work.  But, just like learning to ride a bike, once you get the hang of it, you'll be well on your way to being a better legal reader (and a better advocate on behalf of your future clients too).  (Scott Johns).

Anxious about starting law school? Worried you don't know it all?

Have no fear, you are not alone!

Honestly, it's very normal to feel anxious and nervous the summer before law school. But everyone feels that way, so first, be assured that you are not alone.

Also,  if you are a first generation student, it's completely normal to question whether you belong, and whether you will fit in. But I promise you - you DO belong, you WILL fit in. You are not alone.  I was a first generation college and law student. I went into my first year having never met a single lawyer, not knowing any of the language, and not having any idea how anything works. So, if that's how you are feeling right now - I have some advice for you!

First - RELAX. Please. Use what time you have left before classes start to read a fun non fiction book, or binge some netflix. Chat with family and friends.  I saw some great advice about getting things in order - like medical appointments, dental, etc., and trying to fit them in before you start. It was also suggested that you stock up on things for the house in bulk, so you aren't running out of essentials, and that you stock up on things like cold medicine, tylenol, etc. This is a great idea, I don't dispute it, and if you can, please do. However, I went to law school in Boston (meaning tiny apartment shared with others) and I'm also fairly certain that in early August, before the financial aid check came in, I had less than $100 to my name. I might have been lucky to have $10 to my name after moving, to be honest. The point is, space and money would have meant that I couldn't stock up anything, so if that's you, you're also not alone.  Essentially just use the time before classes start to relax, and try not to worry too much. 

Second - I created a First Year Glossary. I started by defining words that I didn't know when I entered law school, and then I polled my first years and asked them words they wish they had known. This is not meant to be exhaustive, by any stretch, but is meant to give you a good start. Download AL_StudentSuccess_Glossary_061121

Third - Try some CALI Lessons. I have my first year students do a few of these CALI lessons during Orientation. You can get a code from your law school if you are an admitted student, and they are free! (and once classes start, there are lessons on every topic - and they are very helpful!)  https://cali.org/category/2l-3l-upper-level-topics/law-school-success

Fourth - If you are entitled to accommodations, or even just think you might be - please use them! I realize that depending on the school, the process can be daunting, but please don't let that discourage you. Start now, as it can take some time, or require more up to date testing. And don't try to go at it without accommodations.  Every spring I meet with students who were not as successful as they had hoped, and most of them would have benefitted by using accommodations. However, they tell me they were nervous, worried others would know, or somehow felt that they had to prove they could succeed without them. First, accommodations are confidential - no one else will know. Not classmates, not professors, not future employers - so use them. If someone uses glasses to read, you wouldn't expect them to take their exams without glasses, that would be ridiculous. Being a lawyer means advocating for others, so start law school by advocating for yourself and your needs, and use what is going to help you be successful! 

Finally - know you are not alone, and don't be afraid to ask questions, or ask for help. I start the year by telling my students there are no stupid questions, and this is true. I honestly believe the only stupid questions are the ones left unasked. I promise you that someone else in your class is struggling with the same things you are  - so go to student services, go to your professor, go to Academic Support, go to tutors - and ask away. They all want to help you, I promise that!

Good luck, and remember that you DO belong!

(Melissa Hale)

The Mistaken Impression that Prior Exams are for Review and Not Practice

Over the years, I have noticed that many legal educators and students have an imperfect understanding of the utility of using prior exams for practice.  This misunderstanding usually holds that the purpose of such materials is for students to review the exams simply to see what topics professors test and methods with which they do so.  In turn, faculty become leery of providing such materials, as doing so might create an unwarranted expectation on students’ part that their exam will test the same topics and use the same methods.

This impression is problematic.  Both students and faculty are squandering the opportunity for students to use materials that will make them better learners, improve their performance in law school and the bar exam, and increase their knowledge and skills (both in classes and on the bar exam).

An important recent (methodologically sophisticated) study supports this claim. In Understanding the Metacognitive “Space” and its Implications for Law Students’ Learning, Professors Jennifer Gundlach and Jessica Santagelo found statistically significant evidence that:  “Students who reported using active strategies at the end of the semester were more likely to succeed in the class … relative to students who never used active strategies.”

Plenty of studies in other fields express similar results.

Faculty should better understand the use of prior exams and other materials that would allow students to practice rather than re-read over and over again.  Although many law professors used re-reading and re-reviewing prior exams in their studies, their success quite possibly could have been despite and not because of those flawed methods.  Faculty tend to have had an elite education, elite aptitude, and elite socio-economic condition opportunities for academic success.  They thus had a great degree of wiggle-room in terms of the efficacy of their learning methods

Many of our students are not so lucky.  If we admit students with fewer socio-economic opportunities and with non-elite academic credentials, we should not erect further obstacles to their success by assuming that the methods we used in very different circumstances will be effective for them. 

Especially given the recent findings quoted above, we should not rely on the anecdote fallacy (that because one person had success with a method all will have such success) and the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy (that because certain study methods preceded success, those methods must have caused that success).  Instead, we should rely on the empirical evidence that shows that active learning, including taking practice exams, fosters success more optimally.

(Louis Schulze, FIU Law)