Legal Skills Prof Blog

Professor Lou Sirico

It's with a very heavy heart that I let our readers know Professor Lou Sirico, the co-editor of the Legal Skills Prof Blog, passed away at 8:13 a.m. this morning, Wednesday, December 26, 2018. Lou had recently been diagnosed with cancer. To say that I'm devastated by the news doesn't adequately describe the emotions running through my mind right now. More than a great friend, colleague and mentor, Lou was a guiding presence in my life, helping me through some very difficult times including the death of my mother and my own battle with cancer out of which this blog was born. Lou was cut from a different cloth than others. Indeed, I can't think of anyone else who can come close to filling the void left by him. 

I'll write and post here a more formal tribute to Lou in the days ahead after I've had time to collect my thoughts and find the right words to describe the kind of person Lou was to those who knew him. In the meantime, our thoughts go out to his family and the many people who loved and cared about him.

Rest in peace sweet man. We will not see the likes of you again.

(jbl).

Christmas Torts

This time of year, most of us have Christmas cheer, but a few of us experience Christmas torts.  Jonathan Turley has a funny article on Christmas torts here.

"Tis the season for Christmas torts and it is not just stockings hung from the chimney with care. Fathers are dangling from rooftops ensnared in lights while trees spontaneously combust to illuminate the coming of the new year. Christmas is proof that God first created man and then created counsel. Because after all, what holiday begins with a curiously dressed overweight man squeezing himself down your chimney? Even if he does not have a heart attack in your flue, his entry would satisfy the conditions of the Castle Doctrine in a majority states to repel him with lethal force."

(Scott Fruehwald)

"Young lawyers can be technophobes too"

A popular stereotype about law students is that because they grew up using digital technologies, they're all proficient with it. But that's because most observers conflate fluency in digital technology with proficiency. In fact, there's lots of hard evidence that so-called digital natives are not very expert when it comes to using digital technology. In reality, they use it for a very narrow range of activities limited to socializing, shopping and some gaming. Here's an article and companion podcast that makes a similar point about post-millennial's reluctance to try new technologies. From the Legal Rebels column at the ABA Journal blog:

Young lawyers can be technophobes too, says legal tech entrepreneur Monica Goyal

 

Many lawyers are reluctant to adopt new legal technology, says Monica Goyal, who developed platforms including My Legal Briefcase, which helps parties in the Canadian small claims courts, and Aluvion Law, which uses automation to cut legal services costs for small businesses.

“Even young lawyers—we think young lawyers are on Facebook, Twitter, they’re using computers, and that somehow they will be more willing to try and experiment with new technology. I’ve found that’s not the case,” says Goyal, a visiting professor at Toronto’s Osgoode Hall Law School, where her work focuses on teaching legal technology.

 

"One of the things I do at the law school is give students ideas about what tools are out there and how they can connect that to their practices in the future,” adds Goyal, who also has her own law firm in Toronto.

. . . . 

Continue reading and listening here.

(jbl).

"Columbia Law School Students Are Turning Into Legal Tech Developers"

This story is from Legal Tech News:

Columbia Law School Students Are Turning Into Legal Tech Developers

Columbia Law School students are using a legal tech company's document automation software to address the legal needs of New York City tenants and low-wage workers in South America.

 

Columbia Law School students are using a software program to create apps to help various legal organizations’ clients automate the drafting of legal documents. The project came after Columbia Law School Legal Technology Association, a student-led association seeking to expose members to the broad scope of legal technology, and HelpSelf Legal teamed up in the spring 2018 semester to offer HelpSelf’s document automation builder software for worthy causes.

 

These Columbia students join a growing group of law students across the U.S. using their burgeoning legal knowledge to create user-friendly apps to help automatize services for legal aid organizations’ clients.

 

HelpSelf’s document automation builder software allows users to create form-based interviews, which clients fill out with necessary information directly on a site. The clients’ answers merge into a specified document and automatically generate “execution-ready documents.”

 

HelpSelf Legal is the brainchild of former Sidley Austin associate Dorna Moini. Moini told The Recorder in January that she left Big Law after six years to focus on creating a “system that will allow people to have much greater success than they would if they were going it on their own.”

 

Columbia law students will use HelpSelf’s automated document software to help potential litigants with their legal document preparation.

 

Cecilia Plaza, a second-year law student at Columbia Law School, said she and others have teamed up with the New York City Housing Court to create a mobile- and desktop-accessible app to help tenants. Tenants answer questions created by the students, and their answers will generate a legal document. A legal aid attorney will be available to review and provide pro bono, explained HelpSelf Legal’s Moini.

 

After signing up for the project in April, Plaza explained, her group contacted legal aid organizations and nonprofits for feedback on where they thought clients would most benefit. They found that housing matters, such as tenants having to respond to a landlord’s allegations of nonpayment, was a pressing legal matter, Plaza said.

. . . . 

Continue reading here.

(jbl).

Newsletter of the Leadership Section of the AALS

The Leadership Section of the AALS has started a newsletter.  You can find it here.

"The Newsletter contains announcements of programs and section activities, the results of a survey of leadership programs and courses at law schools and access to links to ten articles on leadership from the Conference on Advancing Leadership in the Legal Profession held last April at Santa Clara Law School."

"The Leadership Section was established in November 2017 to promote leadership development for law students and lawyers. Even though lawyers play leadership roles in society and with clients and leadership is a crucial skill that employers value, law schools have been slow to provide leadership development in contrast business, government, medical and most other schools. We are making progress to address this need. The number of law school that has leadership courses or programs has grown in the last 18 months from 18 to over 45."

(Scott Fruehwald) (hat tip: David Gibbs)

Institute for Law Teaching and Learning accepting presentation proposals for its Summer 2019 conference - deadline is February 15

This summer's conference will be held at Washburn Law School in Topeka, Kansas. I almost went to the one last year in Gonzaga but-for a scheduling issue on my end. Maybe I'll try to make it this year instead. Regardless, you should try to attend if you can. Here are the details:

CALL FOR PRESENTATION PROPOSALS

 

Institute for Law Teaching and Learning Summer Conference

“Teaching Today’s Law Students”June 3-5, 2019
Washburn University School of Law
Topeka, Kansas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

The proposal deadline is February 15, 2019. Submit proposals via email to Professor Emily Grant, Co-Director, Institute for Law Teaching and Learning, at emily.grant@washburn.edu.

 

(jbl).

"Yale's Samuel Moyn Does Not Understand Legal Clinics"

• Steve Lubet (Northwestern), Yale's Samuel Moyn Does Not Understand Legal Clinics
• Samuel Moyn (Yale), Chronicle of Higher Education Op-Ed:  Law Schools Are Bad for Democracy

In his article, "Law Schools Are Bad For Democracy," Samuel Moyn of Yale Law School has partially blamed clinics for law schools' failure to allow students to "do good."  He has written concerning law schools in general, "Nowhere is this image management more troubling than when it mystifies the real function of law schools in reorienting the hopes and even reshaping the personalities of the young people who enter them. Having entertained inchoate dreams about social transformation, the students themselves are transformed the most, especially when they accept a set of beliefs about how the world is likeliest to change — through a politics of marginal legal reform by insiders to the system. That is, if the world can change at all."  He continued specifically on clinics, "Rarely asked, however, is whether the clinical revolution is actually about changing the world. For individuals, it might help provide an alibi for the grubby scramble for advantage. If your social-justice work harmonizes so easily with elite credentialing for power and wealth, is it good for society? Or even for you? One can question the institution’s rationalizations, too. Clinical activism can serve to launder and legitimate injustice."

Steve Lubet strongly criticized Moyn's view of clinics.  He began, "Yale’s Samuel Moyn has examined the nature of elite law schools and finds them lacking in virtue.  His recent essay in the Chronicle of Higher Education, titled “Law Schools Are Bad for Democracy,” laments in its subtitle that they “whitewash the grubby scramble for power.” There is nothing new in Moyn’s observation that that “large numbers of students entering law school say that they hope to work in the public interest, but then end up working for large firms instead.” Oddly, however, he proceeds to fasten this phenomenon on public interest law. No kidding. Moyn says, “the students themselves are transformed the most, especially when they accept a set of beliefs about how the world is likeliest to change — through a politics of marginal legal reform by insiders to the system."  "Law school clinics, according to Moyn, only magnify the problem."

Lubet responded, "I don’t know where Moyn gets his information – he teaches in the areas of human rights and twentieth century European moral and political theory – but every clinician I know spends a good deal of time considering the social impact of their work, and none of them are concerned with alibis or grubby scrambles, much less laundering injustice."  He noted, "There is plenty of valid criticism of law schools in Moyn’s essay, but his own elitism still shines through even as he bemoans careerism in others."  He concluded, "Moyn may believe that he has a better plan for changing the world, and perhaps he does. But his ultimate goal of demystifying “law’s disservice to the interests of ordinary people” is actually being achieved in legal clinics every day."

(Scott Fruehwald)

 

Tips from Hillary Mantis at National Jurist on expanding your job search

The advice here is fundamental but that doesn't mean it isn't worth repeating. Further, it's a truism of life that the most successful people in any endeavor always practice the fundamentals. That goes for job searches too.  To wit, develop practical legal skills, network until you can't network anymore, and fine tune those resumes and cover letters to a fare thee well.

From National Jurist Magazine:  3 ways to expand your job search

 

It’s winter and you don’t have any job offers yet. No job offers? No worries. You still have plenty of time, and plenty of options. While there may not be as many lawyers recruiting on campus, that does not mean that there are no jobs left.

 

Here are some ideas for gearing up for a spring semester job search:

 

-Register for a spring semester clinic or externship in a practice area that interests you: If you can get experience to add to your resume in an area you are trying to break into, that will help reinvigorate your job search. Law schools have expanded clinics and externships in recent years. They are now offered in many different practice areas. Between clinics, externships, journals, and centers, law schools offer several ways to get specialized experience, which you can add to your resume. Contributing to school blogs, or other writing opportunities can also help you develop a specialization.

 

-Sign up for opportunities to meet alumni: Does your career services office or alumni office offer an alumni mentor program? I’ve heard so many great stories about students connecting with an alumni through these types of programs. Is there a panel at your school with alumni speakers? Go to it, and introduce yourself to them at the end of the program. . . . 

Continue reading here.

(jbl).

I'll be on a short break but keep the faith

I'm taking a short break/vacation this week so my blogging activity may slow down and I may also take a bit longer than usual to get back to you. So please be patient. My blogging colleague Scott will be holding down the fort in my absence so fear not. Keep those tips, cards, and letters rolling in and I'll respond when I get back into town on 12/23.

Most importantly, however, keep in your thoughts our co-founder, friend and mentor to many Professor Lou Sirico who's fighting a tough health issue right now.  He's always in my thoughts - hang in there buddy.

(jbl).

Teaching the post-Millennial generation in law school

Here's another article you should check out during your grading respites over the holiday break - Professor Laura Graham of Wake Forest has just posted a great article on SSRN discussing how to teach the post-millennial generation in law school (and in it, she gives a nice hat tip to me - thank you). Professor Graham's article is forthcoming in the University of Arkansas Little Rock Law Review but you can read it now here. From the abstract:

In 2017, law schools welcomed the first members of Generation Z to their halls. While Generation Z students (born between 1995 and 2010) share some commonalities with their predecessors, the Millennials, they have a distinct peer personality that has been shaped by the culture and events of their youth. This Article begins with the premise that legal educators would benefit from learning what makes Generation Z students “tick,” so that we can partner with them more effectively as they prepare to enter the legal profession.

This Article begins by reviewing the basic principles and inherent limitations of generational theory, as a backdrop against which to view Generation Z. The Article then summarizes what research has revealed thus far about Generation Z’s peer personality, focusing on four traits: they are diverse, financially conservative, insecure and anxious, and growing up more slowly than previous generations.

This Article then examines three learning characteristics of Generation Z students that have direct implications for legal educators: they are saturated with technology, they are weaker than their predecessor generations in critical reading, thinking, and writing, and they prefer to work alone rather than in collaborative settings.

Finally, this Article suggests concrete strategies for legal educators to address the challenges presented by Generation Z students, focusing on five areas: (1) more instruction in critical reading; (2) more writing opportunities across the law school curriculum; (3) more thoughtful (and perhaps more sparing) use of technology in the classroom; (4) more careful attention to how and when we use collaborative learning techniques; and (5) more emphasis on encouraging mindfulness and wellness in our students.

(jbl). 

Latest volume of U. Detroit Mercy Law Review devoted to assessing student performance in law school

The most recent volume of U. Detroit Mercy Law Review contains several articles discussing student assessments in law school including:

• Elizabeth M. Bloom, Creating Desirable Difficulties: Strategies for Reshaping Teaching and Learning in the Law School Classroom, 95 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 115 (2018). 
• James McGrath, Planning Your Class to Take Advantage of Highly Effective Learning Techniques, 95 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 153 (2018). 
• Abigail Loftus DeBlasis and Elizabeth Adamo Usman, Unrealized Potential: How Shifting the Focus to Student Learning Outcomes Could Reduce Law Student Distress, 95 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 179 (2018). 
• Victoria L. VanZandt, The Assessment Mandates in the ABA Accreditation Standards and Their Impact on Individual Academic Freedom Rights, 95 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 253 (2018). 

Your winter break reading list is now set.

(jbl).

New Survey finds most Americans would use a less expensive online alternative to hiring a lawyer

That's according to a recent survey of 2,000 adults conducted by Harris Poll. The survey found that the vast majority of respondents would prefer a cheaper, online alternative to hiring a lawyer for small legal matters. Legal Tech News has the story:

Survey: 69 Percent of People Would Use Online Legal Services Over Attorneys

The survey found most Americans are willing to trade off a traditional lawyer experience for small legal matters if it saves them a few bucks. Respondents said they would be comfortable using an online-based alternative.

 

A new survey has found that many American adults are willing to use alternative legal providers as a way to save on legal costs.

 

Over 2,000 U.S. adults answered the online survey earlier this month. The survey was conducted by the Harris Poll at the request of Your Lawyers Online, an online legal service provider that guides clients through family, animal and estate planning law.

 

According to the findings, 82 percent of respondents said they wanted alternatives to traditional lawyers when dealing with small legal matters, such as making a will and document review. In addition, 76 percent of respondents aged 18 to 54 said they were willing to use online legal services if it could save them money. By contrast, only 65 percent of those aged 55-plus said they would consider using alternative legal services.

 

There was a similar discrepancy between groups with different incomes. Seventy-two percent of surveyed households with income below $100,000 said they would likely use online legal services, while only 62 percent of those with incomes above $100,000 said the same.

 

Likewise, though 55 percent of people in households earning less that $50,000 said an online lawyer could provide anonymity needed for a sensitive legal matter, less than half (47 percent) of households earning $100,000-plus agreed.

 

However, even higher earners found not all legal matters needed a lawyer, or perhaps their costly fees. Of surveyed households that earn over $100,000, 79 percent said they “wish” there was an alternative to traditional lawyers.

 

A legal trends report released earlier this year by Clio, a cloud-based legal service provider, found similar results. When Clio asked consumers what would influence them to not seek legal solutions for their problems, 35 said the benefits are not worth the money, and 31 percent said it cost too much.

 

The popularity of LegalZoom, a web-based legal service provider, gives some credence to such survey findings. Indeed, consumer-facing legal services are raising venture capital funding, including LegalZoom’s mammoth $500 million investment raised earlier this year.

. . . . 

Continue reading here.

(jbl).

We got some good news about Lou Sirico today

We learned today that Lou's been transferred out of the ICU so all his many friends will be happy to hear about that.  Everyone here continues to send the most positive thoughts and well-wishes we can muster. Hang in there, buddy, we're all pulling for you.

(The Legal Skills Prof Blog).

Should California Lower Its Bar Passage Score?

California's bar passage rate has been disastrous the last two years.  Three California law school deans wrote an op-ed in the LA Times urging that the "cut-score" be lowered to allow more applicants to pass the bar.  Some have responded to this argument by declaring that the bar passage rate fell in conjunction with California law schools admitting less competent applicants (lower LSATs and GPAs).

Jill Switzer has written an insightful piece on this controversy on Above the Law.  Excerpts:

"These deans concede that between 2010 and 2017, law schools admitted students with lesser LSAT scores and lower GPAs, and they also concede that 'there is undoubtedly some correlation between those metrics and performance on the bar exam and in law school.' Duh."  (emphasis added)

"My point is that I am tired of the law deans whining. This seems to me to be a classic case of 'blaming the victim,' i.e., the exam, when the blame should lie with the education that law students receive. If incoming students can’t write a cogent sentence, let alone a paragraph, without grammatical mistakes and typos, without understanding and analyzing the issue correctly, then what chance do they have of persuading a court to rule in their client’s favor? Should they even be in law school?"

"If anyone has the right to whine, it’s those students who failed the bar exam. Three or perhaps four years of law school, massive quantities of debt, and facing the unhappy prospect of having to take the bar exam again. Were they adequately prepared? Did they do the work and the studying necessary?"

"Law school deans holler about the bar cut score and the lack of access to justice, but would lowering the cut score improve access to justice, and would it improve the quality of the access to justice?"

"Here in California, and I would imagine in other states as well, the stated purpose of the State Bar is public protection, regulating attorneys, and promoting access to justice. So, if the cut score is lowered and malpractice claims rise and the number of attorneys who are disciplined rise, how does that mesh with the purpose of public protection?"

The bottom line is that the bar exam's purpose is to protect the public.  Lowering the pass score will not further this purpose.

As we have written countless times on this blog, if law schools want to raise the bar pass rate, they need to improve the education they are providing. 

One possibility, as Switzer suggests, is to have a test of students' writing ability before they enter law school and to have remedial classes for those who fail the test.  I have many more suggestions for improving legal education in my book How To Grow A Lawyer: A Guide for Law Schools, Law Professors, and Law Students (2018).

(Scott Fruehwald)

Calling all law librarians - tune in Wednesday for the AALL webinar on how to get published

A reminder to all AALL members and other law librarians interested in publishing scholarly work. There's a webinar (free to AALL members) on Wednesday at noon EST in which several panelists will discuss the wheres, hows and whys of getting published as a law librarian. Here are the details from our previously posted announcement:

Upcoming Webinar – Wednesday December 12, 2018 (11am - 12pm US/Central)

Register here: 

EDITOR INSIGHTS: A WEBINAR PANEL ON PUBLISHING YOUR WRITING Wednesday, December 12, 2018 (11am - 12pm US/Central)

DESCRIPTION

Have you ever wondered what it takes to get an article published? Have you thought about writing but weren’t sure where to start? There is enormous interest in producing scholarship, but many of us struggle with making time, developing topics, and staying motivated. This webinar will feature a panel of editors from five major law library publications, who will demystify the writing and publication process by providing insight into what makes a good article, what the editors look for when they review submissions, and how to build collaborative relationships with your editors. The panelists will discuss the unique attributes of different publications and help authors think strategically about publication avenues. They will also share tips for writing and producing scholarship, trends, and areas in need of more research and exploration. 

Attendees will learn: 
• insights into the publishing process for key law library publications 
• how the peer review process works 
• advice for writing publication-worthy content 
PANELIST INFORMATION

Speakers: 

Kristina L. Niedringhaus 
Kristina L. Niedringhaus is Associate Dean for Library and Information Services and Professor at Georgia State University College of Law Library. Kris was appointed as Editorial Director of AALL Spectrum in June 2016. She writes and speaks on topics related to law library administration, legal research, technology, and ethical issues related to legal research and the use of technology. Kris currently serves as the President of SEAALL and Vice-President of the CALI Board of Directors. 

Mike Chiorazzi 
Mike Chiorazzi Prior to joining the University of Miami, Dean Chiorazzi was associate Dean and James & Beverly Professor of Law at the James E. Rogers College of Law from 1996-2018. He began his career as a reference librarian and senior instructor in legal research at Duke University School of Law (1981 - 1989). Subsequently, he served as the deputy director of the Law Library and legal research instructor at the Boston College School of Law (1989 - 1996). Since 1999 he has served as the editor of Legal Reference Services Quarterly. 

Susan Nevelow Mart 
Susan Nevelow Mart is the Director of the Law Library at the University of Colorado Law School in Boulder. Since 2012, she has hosted the annual Boulder Conference of Legal Information: Scholarship and Teaching, a gathering of law librarians who meet to critique scholarly works-in-progress and develop a pedagogy of legal research instruction. In 2015, Professor Mart established the Legal Information Review, law librarianship’s only blind, peer-reviewed journal, published annually by the William S. Hein, which accepts articles of any type, in any format, on pedagogy, information policy, information retrieval, access to information, and practice issues. 

Tom Gaylord 
Tom Gaylord is the Faculty Services & Scholarly Communications Librarian at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, and the incoming editor of Law Library Journal. Prior to joining Northwestern in 2014, Tom was a Senior Reference Librarian at Chicago-Kent College of Law. He has been a member of AALL since 2002. 

James Levy 
Professor James B. Levy teaches legal research and writing at Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law. He is the current Editor-in-Chief of Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing (a Thomson Reuters publication) and was previously EIC of The Journal of the Legal Writing Institute. He is also the founder and editor of the Legal Skills Prof Blog, a former Chair of the AALS Section on Teaching Methods and former board member of the Legal Writing Institute. He has published several articles on law school teaching and LRW pedagogy. 

Moderator: 

Michele A. L. Villagran 
Dr. Michele A. L. Villagran is an accomplished educator, innovative speaker, entrepreneur, consultant, cultural intelligence and diversity & inclusion expert with over 24+ years of experience in the public and private sectors. She is an Assistant Professor with San Jose State University School of Information. Dr. Villagran’s research focuses on cultural diversity and social justice in library and information science and cultural intelligence phenomena within libraries. 

Registration Fees:  These fees are available through 12/10/2018
Name	Price	Available To
Site Registration - Member	$125.00	Retired Student Individual Honorary
Site Registration - Non Member	$150.00	NonMember
Non Member	$60.00	NonMember
Member	$0.00	Retired Student Individual Honorary

Cancellation and Other Policies:
Cancellations and refund requests must be made in writing and emailed to csmith@aall.org by the registration deadline. No refunds will be given after the registration deadline. Refunds will not be given for no-shows. 

(jbl).

Abandoning Predictions by Kevin Bennardo

Abandoning Predictions by Kevin Bennardo,

"Analytical documents are a hallmark of the law school legal writing curriculum and of the practice of law. In these documents, the author usually applies a body of law to a set of facts and reaches a conclusion. Oftentimes, that conclusion is phrased as a prediction (“The court is likely to find…”), and many academics even refer to analytical documents as “predictive” document types. If that describes you, this Essay's goal is to convince you to change your ways.

Simply put, there is a difference between conducting a legal analysis and predicting the outcome of a legal dispute. If the author of an analytical document has only conducted a legal analysis, they have no business claiming that they can predict the outcome of the dispute. That distinction should be recognized in the teaching of analytical document genres and should be conveyed by legal professionals in their communication of legal analyses."

Great point!  There is a significant difference between analysis and prediction.  Ignoring this distinction is another area that comes under cognitive biases.

(Scott Fruehwald)

Legal sector drops 2400 jobs in November

This month's Bureau of Labor Statistics job report is out and it shows the legal sector dropped 2400 jobs last month (click on the link and scroll down to "Professional and business services - Legal services"). Although the legal sector added a combined, adjusted, total of 1600 jobs during September and October, this latest report means that the legal sector was employing 100 less people last month compared to November 2017.  The American Lawyer has more details here.

(jbl).  

Smartphones are the Opiates of the Masses

The TaxProf Blog has a post in which a professor asks whether smartphones are an "academic equalizer."  The problem with this suggestion is that smartphones are addictive.

In writing my book Overcoming Cognitive Biases: Thinking More Clearly and Avoiding Manipulation by Others, I discovered that many scientists believe that smartphones are addictive, and that tech companies are using this fact to sell ads and products and even program people.

Comedian Bill Maher declared, “Apple, Google, Facebook, they are essentially drug dealers.” Similarly, 60 Minutes had a segment on “brain hacking.”

Tech companies do this because “[i]t’s not neutral. They want you to use it in particular ways and for long periods of time. Because that’s how they make their money.” A tech company head similarly stated, “You’re guinea pigs. You are guinea pigs in the box pushing the button and sometimes getting the likes. And they’re doing this to keep you in there.” Finally, “The longer we look at our screens, the more data companies collect about us, and the more ads we see. Ad spending on social media has doubled in just two years to more than $31 billion.”

One scientist noted, “whether they want to or not, they are shaping the thoughts and feelings and actions of people. They are programming people. There’s always this narrative that technology’s neutral. And it’s up to us to choose how we use it. This is just not true.”

In sum, giving smartphones to students plays into the tech companies trying to get young people hooked.

(Scott Fruehwald)

Webinar for law librarians on Wednesday, December 12 on how to get published

I'll be participating in a webinar next Wednesday, December 12 at noon EST, sponsored by the Association of American Law Libraries (AALL) on how to get published as a law librarian. This hour long webinar is free to AALL members though you have to register by Monday, 12/10. Non-members can still attend but there's a fee. Below is a brief description of the webinar as well the names and credentials of the other panelists.  We did an hour-long dress rehearsal today and I have to say I'm deeply impressed with the amount of time and effort AALL has put into organizing this thing. I hope you'll join us next Wednesday.

**The registration deadline for this webinar has been extended to Monday, December 10th**

Upcoming Webinar – Wednesday December 12, 2018 (11am - 12pm US/Central)

 

Register here: 

EDITOR INSIGHTS: A WEBINAR PANEL ON PUBLISHING YOUR WRITING Wednesday, December 12, 2018 (11am - 12pm US/Central)

DESCRIPTION

Have you ever wondered what it takes to get an article published? Have you thought about writing but weren’t sure where to start? There is enormous interest in producing scholarship, but many of us struggle with making time, developing topics, and staying motivated. This webinar will feature a panel of editors from five major law library publications, who will demystify the writing and publication process by providing insight into what makes a good article, what the editors look for when they review submissions, and how to build collaborative relationships with your editors. The panelists will discuss the unique attributes of different publications and help authors think strategically about publication avenues. They will also share tips for writing and producing scholarship, trends, and areas in need of more research and exploration. 

Attendees will learn: 
• insights into the publishing process for key law library publications 
• how the peer review process works 
• advice for writing publication-worthy content 
PANELIST INFORMATION

Speakers: 

Kristina L. Niedringhaus 
Kristina L. Niedringhaus is Associate Dean for Library and Information Services and Professor at Georgia State University College of Law Library. Kris was appointed as Editorial Director of AALL Spectrum in June 2016. She writes and speaks on topics related to law library administration, legal research, technology, and ethical issues related to legal research and the use of technology. Kris currently serves as the President of SEAALL and Vice-President of the CALI Board of Directors. 

Mike Chiorazzi 
Mike Chiorazzi Prior to joining the University of Miami, Dean Chiorazzi was associate Dean and James & Beverly Professor of Law at the James E. Rogers College of Law from 1996-2018. He began his career as a reference librarian and senior instructor in legal research at Duke University School of Law (1981 - 1989). Subsequently, he served as the deputy director of the Law Library and legal research instructor at the Boston College School of Law (1989 - 1996). Since 1999 he has served as the editor of Legal Reference Services Quarterly. 

Susan Nevelow Mart 
Susan Nevelow Mart is the Director of the Law Library at the University of Colorado Law School in Boulder. Since 2012, she has hosted the annual Boulder Conference of Legal Information: Scholarship and Teaching, a gathering of law librarians who meet to critique scholarly works-in-progress and develop a pedagogy of legal research instruction. In 2015, Professor Mart established the Legal Information Review, law librarianship’s only blind, peer-reviewed journal, published annually by the William S. Hein, which accepts articles of any type, in any format, on pedagogy, information policy, information retrieval, access to information, and practice issues. 

Tom Gaylord 
Tom Gaylord is the Faculty Services & Scholarly Communications Librarian at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, and the incoming editor of Law Library Journal. Prior to joining Northwestern in 2014, Tom was a Senior Reference Librarian at Chicago-Kent College of Law. He has been a member of AALL since 2002. 

James Levy 
Professor James B. Levy teaches legal research and writing at Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad College of Law. He is the current Editor-in-Chief of Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing (a Thomson Reuters publication) and was previously EIC of The Journal of the Legal Writing Institute. He is also the founder and editor of the Legal Skills Prof Blog, a former Chair of the AALS Section on Teaching Methods and former board member of the Legal Writing Institute. He has published several articles on law school teaching and LRW pedagogy. 

Moderator: 

Michele A. L. Villagran 
Dr. Michele A. L. Villagran is an accomplished educator, innovative speaker, entrepreneur, consultant, cultural intelligence and diversity & inclusion expert with over 24+ years of experience in the public and private sectors. She is an Assistant Professor with San Jose State University School of Information. Dr. Villagran’s research focuses on cultural diversity and social justice in library and information science and cultural intelligence phenomena within libraries. 

Registration Fees:  These fees are available through 12/10/2018
Name	Price	Available To
Site Registration - Member	$125.00	Retired Student Individual Honorary
Site Registration - Non Member	$150.00	NonMember
Non Member	$60.00	NonMember
Member	$0.00	Retired Student Individual Honorary

Cancellation and Other Policies:
Cancellations and refund requests must be made in writing and emailed to csmith@aall.org by the registration deadline. No refunds will be given after the registration deadline. Refunds will not be given for no-shows. 

(jbl).

Sending positive thoughts to our friend Lou Sirico

I think some of our readers may know that Lou, the man who helped me start this blog, is dealing with a very serious medical issue right now. I'm not sure how much detail is OK to reveal but I just learned he's in the hospital again today so I wanted to publicly state, in case he's reading this and for all his many friends, you're always in my thoughts. You've been a true friend, key mentor and personal inspiration to me. I'm not the kind of person who casually tosses around those thoughts or sentiments. They're precious and should be saved for those special people who deserve them. Lou is one of the best men I know and it's important that he know how well loved and respected he is. 

Hang in there buddy - we're all thinking about you.

(From everyone at the Legal Skills Prof Blog).