Tuesday, July 23, 2019

The new issue of "Perspectives - Teaching Legal Research and Writing" is out now (and here's how to submit an article for the next issue)

Here's the press release from Thomson Reuters announcing the new issue of Perspectives with links to each article. Also, click here for information on how to submit an article for publication in the Fall 2019 issue due out in December.  And go here (and click the "subscribe" button in the lower right of your screen) if you'd like to subscribe to Perspectives.

Finally, let me offer a very big "thank you" to Brooke Bowman and Chris Glon for holding down the editorial board fort while I recover from spine surgery. Without them, the new issue and the one to come would surely be delayed).

Vol. 27 | No. 1 | Spring 2019

To Our Readers:

Thank you for your interest in the latest edition of Perspectives. These are exciting times for Perspectives as our new Editorial Board has made some big changes that will make this publication better and stronger going forward. But first, let’s talk about the articles you’ll find in this issue. It leads off with an article by two doctrinal colleagues who offer advice about co-authoring articles with students and the lessons they’ve learned that can help improve student writing generally. We’re excited whenever we get a chance to publish authors outside of our traditional readership so if you’re a doctrinal professor, clinician, judge, or practitioner with something to say about the teaching of legal research or writing, please consider submitting an article. In a similar vein, this issue also includes an article describing how to create legal writing workshops for law students based on briefs written by faculty colleagues. There’s also an article addressing how to add realism to the LRW classroom by incorporating legal briefs from real cases. On the legal research front, we have an article describing an innovative exercise that places students in the role of trial advocates arguing over the relevance and reliability of legislative history materials. Looking for relief from the seemingly endless grind of grading student papers? We’ve got that covered too with another practical article discussing “live critiquing.” It’s not just grading papers that consumes so much time, but all those hours spent meeting and advising students. So be sure to check out the article describing how to create an effective peer mentoring program using student TAs. Maybe you’ve spent the last few years in an administrative position or in law practice away from the classroom and now want to get back to teaching. We’ve got an article that addresses that too. Finally, this issue also contains the second half of our winning entries in the micro essay prompt asking readers to address how Artificial Intelligence will change what we teach in the LRW classroom.

Regarding the big news at Perspectives, the new Editorial Board just passed the first bylaws in the publication’s history setting term limits for board membership and creating an open application process for the Editorial Board. The changes are meant to give everyone interested in serving on the Editorial Board an opportunity to do so. The new board will also be exploring ways to increase our readership, update our web presence, and make better use of social media to promote Perspectives and our authors to a wider audience. Stay tuned and let us know if you’d like to be involved. Most importantly, the Editorial Board thanks Thomson Reuters for its continued support of the LRW community through this publication.

Lastly, this issue of Perspectives is dedicated to the memory of Professor Lou Sirico of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law, a former Perspectives Editorial Board member, a great teacher, respected scholar, supportive colleague, man of high character, and friend.

Running the Race Together: Co-Authoring Legal Scholarship with Students 
Richard A. Bales and Stephen F. Befort

Co-authoring legal scholarship can be rewarding for both faculty and students. This essay describes the experience of two law faculty members who frequently co-author with students, providing advice and potential pitfalls to avoid.
Bringing the Court into the Classroom: Suggestions for How to Craft Exercises for Upper-Level Courses Using Real Practitioners’ Briefs
Benjamin Halasz

Benjamin S. Halasz suggests techniques for teaching legal writing using real briefs for short writing exercises.
Faculty Briefs
Patrick Barry

Patrick Barry describes a new workshop series designed around an underused resource: the written advocacy of faculty members.
Live and Learn: Live Critiquing and Student Learning
Patricia Grande Montana

This article explores the practice of live critiquing – the process of giving students feedback on their written work “live” or in-person, rather than in writing. It discusses the benefits and drawbacks of the practice and offers ways faculty can experiment with it as an alternative to traditional written feedback.
Legislative History on Trial
Jamie R. Abrams

Jamie Abrams provides a method for introducing students to the benefits and pitfalls of using legislative history through an engaging classroom exercise that puts legislative history on trial.
The Need for Peer Mentoring Programs Linked to the Legal Writing Class: An Analysis and Proposed Model 
Amy R. Stein

Amy R. Stein discusses how integrating a peer mentoring program, run by the teaching assistants, into the legal writing class may increase student performance, satisfaction, and retention, and decrease stress.
So You Haven’t Taught Legal Writing in a While . . . .
Judith M. Stinson

Judy Stinson offers suggestions to help LRW faculty, who may not have taught LRW for a few years, prepare for their return to the classroom.
Micro Essays
Read some of the most thought-provoking submissions from your colleagues inspired by the prompt “Will Artificial Intelligence (AI) change how or what we teach in LRW classes? What do you anticipate the impact of AL will be on teaching or learning?” Based on the overwhelming response to our query, we published the first half of our winning entries in last fall’s issue, Volume 26, Number 2. In this issue, we present the remaining winners for your consideration. 

Sonia Bychkov Green 
Jeanne Lamar 
Elizabeth De Armond 
Drew Simshaw
Mark E. Wojcik 
Karin Mika
Brian N. Larson



| Permalink


Post a comment