Using Portfolios for Assessment

Posted on March 10, 2015 by Michele Pistone

A few years ago I started to use student portfolios as part of the end-of-semester evaluation of my students. I have found that portfolios can be an excellent vehicle both for the student’s own self-reflection and for providing summative feedback.

Here is how I use them. At the end of the semester, I ask each student to prepare a portfolio of the written work the student did over the course of the semester. In doing so, each student is asked to read the first and final version of the principal documents that the student drafted during the semester (in the context of my cases, these include the client’s affidavit, any witness affidavits and a brief).

I also ask them to bring the drafts and final versions to the meeting. During the meeting, each student is expected to have reflected on his/her writing, considered how his/her writing progressed over the semester, and point out 2-3 improvements that he or she made. They are also expected to use the drafts to illustrate the progress.

My students find that the act of assembling the portfolio and rereading their own written work serves as a reminder of how far the student has come in crafting a legal theory or developing a factual account of the relevant events or even about some of the obstacles that he or she encountered along the way and how he or she managed to overcome them. I like this method of assessment because it is mainly about self-reflection. Each student in learning from his or her own work. The portfolio is simply a vehicle to make that learning tangible. It is a wonderfully, tangible way to show someone how much he or she has improved over the course of a semester.

I was recently speaking with Larry Farmer from Brigham Young University School of Law. He mentioned that he uses portfolios too. But in his case, they are videos. At the beginning of his course on Interviewing, before any class has been conducted, he asks each student to conduct a mock interview, which is videotaped. The students then spend the semester learning about, practicing, and refining their interviewing techniques.

Then, at the end of the semester, they are asked to review that first interview and to reflect upon their own improvement over the semester. Like the written portfolio that I use, this one also uses a student’s own work to demonstrate learning and progress. I plan to try it next semester.

Are there other ideas out there? Do you use portfolios? If so, how? How can I improve my process? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comment section below.

Filed under: Best Practices | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Law Students Need Mindfulness Training

Posted on March 8, 2015 by sgeorge326

A study published in the journal Science found that a majority of participants would prefer to give themselves mild electrical shocks, rather than be alone with their thoughts for 15 minutes.

Last summer, a tourist in Melbourne, Australia was so engrossed in reading Facebook on her smartphone that she walked off a pier. She couldn’t swim, but thankfully a passerby was paying attention and came to her rescue.

Reports like this no longer seem surprising, given the widespread debate over the distracting effect of the instant availability of information. The smartphone is most often blamed, as everyone from kindergarteners to grandparents seems to have one; checking email, texting, playing games, often at the same time. In a law review article and past blog on the topic of teaching this “smartphone generation” of law students, I discussed how the constant stream of information available and accessed by these students has weakened the part of the brain needed for deep focus and concentration. One antidote to this distraction is mindfulness training.

While mindfulness training is often associated with meditation, its purpose in education can be more broadly seen as allowing students to learn to focus. It is currently being taught in a small number of law schools as a stand-alone class (for credit or pass/fail), part of a clinic, simulation, or professional responsibility class, or part of an orientation or well being program within the law school. But mindfulness can easily be incorporated into any law school class, and needn’t be seen as requiring any special tools or training.

This year in my legal writing course, for example, I forced my students to focus and work on their memorandum mindfully. With phones and laptops put away, I spread the students around the room and allotted 30 minutes to work on a particular portion of their memorandum. I gave them a checklist to keep them focused on the task and no talking is permitted. After they completed their work, I asked them to reflect on what they were able to recognize in their writing that they may not have seen before. Many commented that 30 minutes felt like a long time and they could not believe how much they accomplished. I then asked them to reflect on how it felt to work in this focused manner, and compare that to how they might usually work—surrounded by people, technology, and an endless array of possible distractions. This end of class reflection was important because it encouraged the students to be mindful of their study patterns and habits. While I had lectured to them about working free of distraction, this exercise forced them to feel that focus.

There are many resources available in print and online with more information on mindfulness and exercises that can be used in any classroom. I encourage you to consider mindfulness—it not only benefits students, but allows for more mindful teaching as well.

-Shailini Jandial George

Filed under: Best Practices | 1 Comment »

Starting with WHY — Building Curriculum for Clinic-wide Orientation

Posted on March 3, 2015 by Michele Pistone

My clinical colleagues and I are planning to convert an Orientation that we currently jointly teach into a 2-credit Clinic Orientation module. The Orientation typically includes a mixture of joint classes and smaller individual clinic-focused sessions.

Since we are developing this new course from scratch, it provides an opportunity to think deliberatively about how we design the course and to clarify our objectives and learning outcomes. In light of the changes in ABA accreditation standards, including the need to define learning outcomes and to assess according to our stated objectives, I thought it could be helpful to document the process we are taking as we develop the course.

My faculty colleagues and I met for the first time this week to start brainstorming for development of this new Clinic Orientation course. We started by brainstorming about WHY we want to develop the course. (I was inspired to Start with Why by Simon Sinek. Here is his inspiring TED talk on that topic).

Here is what we came up with as to WHY we want to develop a new jointly-taught, credit-bearing, Orientation module:

  1. Students need to be able to do certain activities early in the semester/hit the ground running:
  • Interviewing
  • Office procedures
  • Reflection/self-critique
  • Professional responsibility 101 (when working with clients)
  • Research
  • Fact investigation (including reading/maintaining files)
  • Working with interpreters
  • Persuasion
  • Attention to cultural difference/ competency/empathy
  1. Explain the WHY of our pedagogy (explain clinical pedagogy to students)
  • Active and engaged learning
  • Direct responsibility – WHY? Autonomy, mastery, purpose
  • Collaboration – across the board, with team, fellow clinic students, students in other clinics, support staff, faculty
  • Acting for Lawyers
  1. Reinforce “one firm” culture – clinical courses are different, collegial, work together, spaces where you can learn while having fun!
  1. Service Mission of Clinics
  1. Set our expectations for students
  1. Efficiency of teaching resources

As we developed this list, our goal was to brainstorm and include as wide a scope of objectives as possible. We decided to leave for another set of meetings the tasks of thinking about how to achieve these goals and what the classes designed to achieve them would look like. Keeping the conversation on task was a challenge; the temptation was to move onto thinking about how or what. We found it easiest when we designated a person to draw us back to the WHY task when the conversation started to branch off into thinking about HOW or WHAT.

Our next step is drawn from the IDEO Design Thinking for Educators Toolkit. IDEO is a design firm. It looks at systems from a design perspective. I am excited to start applying their theories and practices to legal education. I’ll keep you posted as that project develops.

Filed under: Teaching Methodology | Tagged: , , , , | Comments Off on Starting with WHY — Building Curriculum for Clinic-wide Orientation

Teaching “Doing” as a Lawyer During Law School

Posted on March 2, 2015 by Steven Friedland

In doctrinal courses, we are used to teaching students to think critically, an activity often referred to in the legal education domain as “thinking like a lawyer.” This thinking component is central to what lawyers do. But Lee Schulman, a co-author of the Carnegie Report (2007) and author of “Signature Pedagogies in the Professions,” in Daedalus 52 (Summer 2005)and a former professor at Stanford U. has observed that preparing students for the professions requires not only thinking critically, but also acting and performing with integrity. (Integrity is a nice way to describe ethics, using new vocabulary to wrap lawyering in a high standard.)

The ideas of action and performance are not new, but when held up alongside critical thinking, they create a nice trilogy of legal education outcomes. Acting is how lawyers interact with others, prepare, and behave while working, but not performing. Performing is when a lawyer is engaged in a law practice activity requiring competency, such as oral argument, examining a witness at a deposition or trial, or mediating a dispute.

Now that I have provided some background, my essential point in this brief blog post is as follows — If acting and performing are so important, we should be teaching students to do these things throughout law school, starting on the very first day of the first year of school, woven throughout doctrinal courses as well as clinical and legal writing offerings. Learning science supports this integration. In learning science, it has been shown that engaged learners perform better. Creating deliverables is a way to engage students in a positive fashion. Deliverables such as, “Do a direct examination of the plaintiff in this case,” or “Take a picture of an easement on real property and explain why,” or, “Write down ten questions you would have of the plaintiff in this case if you were able to ask them,” are just some illustrations of deliverables. Role-playing generally falls within the rubric of a deliverable, since students must give a performance as an attorney, judge, witness or other person – just not as a student.

Yet, it is hard to get out of our own way. After teaching for a long time, we develop habits that are difficult to shake, and taking risks with new approaches provides its own set of issues as well. But if legal education is really transitioning students through school into practice – and not just teaching discrete substantive segments – we probably ought to try doing something like this, even if only as a Beta test.

Filed under: Best Practices | Comments Off on Teaching “Doing” as a Lawyer During Law School

CSALE 2013-14 Survey of Applied Legal Education

Posted on February 23, 2015 by Mary A. Lynch

The Center for the Study of Applied Legal Education’s (CSALE) 2013-14 Survey of Applied Legal Education is now available on CSALE’s website http://www.csale.org/results.html and on SSRN http://ssrn.com/abstract=2566484

The 43-page report provides the summary results of CSALE’s third triennial survey of law school clinics and externships and the faculty teaching in those clinical courses. Over 88% of ABA-accredited law schools participated in the survey, which included theMaster Survey, Law Clinics Sub-Survey, Field Placement Course Sub-Survey, and Faculty Sub-Survey.

CSALE can also provide free customized reports on questions in the surveys – contact administrator@csale.org or rkuehn@wustl.edu.

Filed under: Best Practices | 1 Comment »

Clinical Law Review Workshop – Registration deadline is June 30, 2015

Posted on February 18, 2015 by Kelly Maloney

The Clinical Law Review will hold its next Clinical Writers’ Workshop on Saturday, September 26, 2015, at NYU Law School.

 

The Workshop will provide an opportunity for clinical teachers who are writing about any subject (clinical pedagogy, substantive law, interdisciplinary analysis, empirical work, etc.) to meet with other clinicians writing on related topics to discuss their works-in-progress and brainstorm ideas for further development of their articles. Attendees will meet in small groups organized, to the extent possible, by the subject matter in which they are writing. Each group will “workshop” the draft of each member of the group.

 

Participation in the Workshop requires the submission of a paper because the workshop takes the form of small group sessions in which all members of the group comment on each other’s manuscripts. By June 30, all applicants will need to submit a mini-draft or prospectus, 3-5 pages in length, of the article they intend to present at the workshop. Full drafts of the articles will be due by September 1, 2015.

 

As in the previous Clinical Law Review Workshops, participants will not have to pay an admission or registration fee but participants will have to arrange and pay for their own travel and lodging. To assist those who wish to participate but who need assistance for travel and lodging, NYU Law School has created a fund for scholarships to help pay for travel and lodging. The scholarships are designed for those clinical faculty who receive little or no travel support from their law schools and who otherwise would not be able to attend this conference without scholarship support. Applicants for scholarships will be asked to submit, with their 3-5 page prospectus, by June 30, a proposed budget for travel and lodging and a brief statement of why the scholarship would be helpful in supporting their attendance at this conference. The Board will review all scholarship applications and issue decisions about scholarships in early July. The scholarships are conditioned upon recipients’ meeting all requirements for workshop participation, including timely submission of drafts, and will be capped at a maximum of $750 per person.

 

Information about the Workshop – including the Registration form, scholarship application form, and information for reserving hotel rooms – is available on-line at:

 

http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/clinicallawreview/clinical-writers-workshop

 

If you have any comments or suggestions you would like to send us, we would be very happy to hear from you. Comments and suggestions should be sent to Randy Hertz at randy.hertz@nyu.edu.

 

— The Board of Editors of the Clinical Law Review

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Workshop on Measuring Learning Gains June 22-24

Posted on February 11, 2015 by glesnerb

Registration is now open for the AALS Midyear Workshop of Measuring Learning Gains. The Workshop will address assessment of learning and evaluation of programs.  The workshop promises to be a hands-on program for legal educators to develop assessment plans and the tools and techniques to make those plans a success.
Register at the AALS website.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Workshop on Measuring Learning Gains June 22-24

Crafting Learning Outcomes — What Verbs Do You Use?

Posted on February 9, 2015 by Michele Pistone

A few years ago my clinical colleagues and I started to jointly teach Orientation for all our clinic students. The Orientation is typically 3 days long (this semester it was only 3 half days) and is a mixture of joint classes and smaller individual clinic-focused sessions. The joint classes focus on topics that are relevant to all clinic students, such as Introduction to Client Interviewing, Cross-Cultural Lawyering, Clinic Procedures, Acting for Lawyers, Persuasion for Lawyers, Factfinding, Legal Research for Clinic and a class devoted to team-building. We also set aside time for each clinic to meet individually to discuss clinic-specific topics.

Now, we’re thinking about whether to convert the Clinic Orientation into a stand-alone, 2-credit module. To me, the process of developing a curriculum and course proposal for this new class provides an opportunity to start backwards – to incorporate some backward design techniques into the course structure and design. Backward design theory explains that while a syllabus can offer a roadmap to the schedule and assignments for a semester, it is far less useful for setting goals and assessing student outcomes. By contrast, articulating learning outcomes at the beginning of the semester enables us as educators to more effectively measure student progress and provides us with a basis of comparison. So, I decided to start this semester with an eye toward the desired outcomes. What did we want our clinic students to know and be able to do at the end of Orientation?

So, as I sat through the Orientation classes this semester, I focused on crafting a series of learning outcomes for our students. Shortly into it, I found that the most challenging part of creating learning objectives is finding the best wording. I wanted to say “understand” for each topic – students would understand the value of client-centered lawyering, for example. But I recalled an earlier post on this blog, by Barbara Glesner-Fines, in which she recommended avoiding vague verbs, such as “understand,” because they do not effectively measure achievement. Instead, we should focus on “action verbs” that clearly define our expectations for our students.

What were the right verbs for my list of learning outcomes? As students go through the curriculum, we expect them to improve and gain new skills. According to Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (1956), there are six categories of cognitive skills that students pass through as they learn. At the basic level, students begin with knowledge skills and gradually acquire skills of comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The language we use for learning objectives should reflect students’ increased cognitive skills throughout the semester. For example, students at the beginning of the semester may be expected to “define,” “recognize,” or “state” the significance of a legal concept, showing their developing skills. By the end of the semester, they should be able to “evaluate,” “interpret,” and “investigate” the proceedings of the courtroom trial, moving into more advanced skills and knowledge.

Here are some more verbs to include based on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:

Knowledge level:

  • Define
  • Describe
  • Recall
  • Record
  • State

Comprehension level:

  • Classify
  • Compare
  • Explain
  • Identify
  • Report

Application level:

  • Apply
  • Construct
  • Summarize
  • Demonstrate
  • Solve
  • Execute

Analysis level:

  • Analyze
  • Distinguish
  • Critique
  • Diagnose
  • Debate

Synthesis level:

  • Develop
  • Plan
  • Manage
  • Organize
  • Propose

Evaluation level:

  • Appraise
  • Argue
  • Conclude
  • Measure
  • Defend
  • Integrate

Knowing that this was a set of outcomes from Orientation and that our students were at the beginning of the learning process, many of the verbs I used are closer to the top of this list than they are to the bottom. At the end of the semester, I might expect to seek outcomes toward the bottom of the Taxonomy.

Here is my draft list of learning objectives for the Villanova Law Clinic Orientation. The process of crafting learning outcomes is still relatively new to me, so I’d love to benefit from the community and hear your comments/feedback on how this list could be improved upon.

Client Interviewing:

  • Students will explain the value of and be able to plan for an initial client interview; anticipate and identify how the client might feel and think about the interview; consider impediments to an effective interview; explain the value of building trust and rapport with a client at the beginning of a lawyer-client relationship; construct a set of goals for an initial client interview from the perspective of both the client and the student/lawyer.
  • Students will plan for and conduct one or more simulations of an initial client interview.
  • Students will be exposed to the importance of cultural sensitivity and issues of difference between themselves and their clients; be able to see the world through the eyes of another and appreciate new perspectives.

Professional Formation/Becoming a Lawyer:

  • Students will be familiar with the competencies necessary to become an effective lawyer and the underlying research; consider what kind of lawyer each student would like to be; develop greater self-awareness; consider how to find happiness as a lawyer in relation to each student’s own individual strengths and virtues.
  • Students will explain the value of learning about an office’s internal operations and recall procedures, such as, where and how to store files, how to maintain files, how to mail correspondence, where to find supplies, who is responsible for different functions in an office and other relevant office matters.

Teamwork and Collaboration:

  • Students will appreciate the value of and complications that may arise from collaborating with others on a team; work on teams for various exercises.

Advocacy:

  • Students will demonstrate principles of persuasion and explain the importance of being persuasive as a lawyer; apply the factors to consider in making a persuasive argument (ethos, pathos and logos), such as understanding one’s audience and how to influence that audience’s heart and mind, building one’s professional reputation and leveraging the reputation of others, as well as the value of building a logical case.

Reflection:

  • Students will implement key understandings about learning, such as the circular process of planning, doing, reflection, with the goal of continuously reflecting upon and improving one’s work.

Diligence and Hard Work:

  • Students will hear about and see models of diligent lawyers, yet also distinguish between diligence and a healthy balance between work and pleasure and the value of levity and playfulness in a workplace

What verbs do you use in assessments and learning objectives? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Filed under: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »

New Journal of Experiential Learning Available Now Online

Posted on February 8, 2015 by Mary A. Lynch

Thanks to Touro Law School,  a new resource for our readers is now available.  The  Touro Law Center’s Journal of Experiential Learning has been launched online.  The inaugural edition  contains a foreword by Professor David Thompson, an Introduction by Dean Patricia Salkin and concluding remarks by Professor Luke Bierman.  Articles include

Ian Gallacher
Wes Porter
Christine Cerniglia Brown
Mary Lynch
Hon. Victoria A. Graffeo
Myra E. Berman

The  second issue will focus on post-JD incubator programs.  A call for papers has been out and a number of articles are already committed.  If you or a colleague would like to contribute, please contact Coordinating Editor, Associate Dean Myra Berman at mberman@tourolaw.edu<mailto:mberman@tourolaw.edu>

Also, if you have thematic ideas for future issues (e.g., legal process, externships/placements, clinics, pro bono, any doctrinal subject area, etc.) please let Dean Berman know.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Hot off the Presses – Evaluation of Experiential Daniel Websters Program Shows Graduates “Ahead of the Curve”

Posted on February 5, 2015 by Mary A. Lynch

The long awaited report from the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) and it’s Educating Tomorrow’s Lawyers project is available on line. Entitled “AHEAD OF THE CURVE Turning Law Students into Lawyers A Study of the Daniel Webster Scholar Honors Program at the University of New Hampshire School of Law “ the report describes the work done “with an evaluation consulting firm to conduct quantitative and qualitative analysis of existing research to evaluate outcomes of the Daniel Webster Scholar Honors Program. “ 

The report authors found:

  • In focus groups, members of the profession and alumni said they believe that students who graduate from the program are a step ahead of new law school graduates;
  •  When evaluated based on standardized client interviews, students in the program outperformed lawyers who had been admitted to practice within the last two years; and
  • The only significant predictor of standardized client interview performance was whether or not the interviewer participated in the Daniel Webster Scholar Honors Program. Neither LSAT scores nor class rank was significantly predictive of interview performance.

This evaluation should prove extremely useful as law schools, state courts and the ABA continue to examine the best way to prepare law students for the profession.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Hot off the Presses – Evaluation of Experiential Daniel Websters Program Shows Graduates “Ahead of the Curve”

Clinical Law Review Board Seeks Applications by Professor Michele Gilman

Posted on February 3, 2015 by Kelly Maloney

The Clinical Law Review seeks applications for four vacancies on the Board of Editors.  The Board urges you to think about whether you would be interested, and to think about others whom you would encourage to apply.

 

Members of the Board of Editors serve for a term of 6 years. The term of the new Board members will commence in January 2016. Board meetings customarily are held twice a year: once at the annual Clinical Law Review Workshop at the end of September and once at the AALS Spring clinical workshop or conference. Board members are expected to attend meetings regularly. Policy matters for the Review and status of upcoming issues are discussed at these meetings. Throughout the year, Board members are asked to work with authors to edit articles. Board members also customarily serve as small group leaders in the Clinical Law Review Workshop.

 

Applicants should explain their interest in the position and should highlight the aspects of their experience that they believe are most relevant. The Board seeks applications from people committed to the work of the Review and strives to select people with diverse backgrounds and varying experiences in and approaches to clinical legal education. Applications and supporting resumes must be received no later than April 1, 2015. Please email them to me at mgilman@ubalt.edu with the subject line:  “Clinical Law Review application.”

 

The committee to select new Board members is always chaired by a current Board member whose term is expiring. I will be serving this year as the chair of the Selection Committee. The other members of the committee will be designated by the three organizations that sponsor the Clinical Law Review — AALS, CLEA, and NYU — each of which have designated two committee members.

 

I encourage you to contact me or other current or former Board members with any questions or for information about service on the Board or the work of a co-Editor-in-Chief. My fellow Board members and I have found it a very rewarding and informative way to continue the advancement of clinical legal education.

 

The other members of the Board are: Amna Akbar; Sameer Ashar, Wendy Bach; Keith Findley, Marty Guggenheim, and Kim Thomas. The current members whose terms are ending, along with mine, are: Carolyn Grose; Mae Quinn, and Brenda Smith.

 

The current Editors-in-Chief are Randy Hertz, Phyllis Goldfarb, and Michael Pinard.

 

Those who previously served on the Board are: Jane Aiken, Tony Alfieri, Bev Balos, Margaret Martin Barry, Ben Barton, Juliet Brodie, Angela Burton, Stacy Caplow, Bob Dinerstein, Jon Dubin, Cecelia Espenoza, Gay Gellhorn, Peter Toll Hoffman, Jonathan Hyman, Peter Joy, Minna Kotkin, Deborah Maranville, Bridget McCormack, Binny Miller, Kim O’Leary, Ascanio Piomelli, Paul Reingold, Jim Stark, Paul Tremblay, Nina Tarr, Rod Uphoff, and Leah Wortham. The Emeritus Editors-in-Chief are Richard Boswell, Steve Ellmann, Isabelle Gunning, and Kate Kruse.

 

I look forward to hearing from you. – Michele Gilman

Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off on Clinical Law Review Board Seeks Applications by Professor Michele Gilman

A Reluctant Technologist – Best Practices for the 21st Century

Posted on January 14, 2015 by Irene Scharf

From a reluctant technologist:  For several reasons, this year we’ve instituted in the clinics at the law school an email security program to boot-strap onto school’s email system we’ve been using to communicate with our students. We did this for a few reasons.  First, we realized that, once the students are not longer in the clinic, if we continued using their general emails, the confidential client case information in those email accounts will remain in their possession.   So, we needed to establish a dedicated email system that would be used exclusively for students’ (and supervisors’) confidential client communications, one that would not follow the students with them when they left the clinic. In addition, these dedicated email addresses can also be used by clients, who are becoming more attuned to the internet and especially email, so they can communicate with their clinic students in a “safe” environment. Finally, these confidential emails are always available to the clinic staff, even after a student leaves the clinic, so that we are able to access this information if it is needed for a case.

 

I was a reluctant participant in this project, feeling that, and fearing that, I was becoming obsolete, given the myriad of technological interconnections in which we, as lawyers and clinicians, must become not just familiar, or proficient, but outstanding.  Also, “Best Practices” for legal practitioners remains open to argument, particularly as the technology, and attempts of outsiders to “invade” these systems, becomes more sophisticated.  It seems that, as soon as one advance is made, it becomes obsolete and needs updating.  This is difficult to keep abreast with, particularly difficult for law school clinical programs, which often do not have the resources to maintain the continued vigilance that seems required these days.

 

For now, though, we’re “all set.”  Let’s see how long that lasts …

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Being in the Moment with our Students

Posted on January 10, 2015 by Irene Scharf

About a month ago, when the President announced that he was taking executive action to address various issues that would assist about 5.5 million immigrants in this country, lawyers, legal services offices, religious organizations, and law schools around the country stepped up to organize, even at the very busy time of year’s – and semester’s – end, to help in whatever way they could.

For law school immigration clinics, and even for law students not enrolled in clinics but interested in helping and dipping their toes into immigration, students and their teachers experienced, in this call to action, “being in the moment” – with their teachers, with their clinics, and with the people who they will help. That immigration clinic faculty all over the country naturally took up this role modeling, while an automatic response to real need, is both a testament to them and a meaningful example law professors can set for their law students. An issue arose. People needed help. Law students were invited to participate, with their teachers, to help those in need. Law school clinics teamed up with local legal services providers. With religiously-affiliated groups. Community-wide events are being held. Everyone working toward a common, worthy goal. Students witness, and participate in, activist, justice-centered lawyering. That’s best practice.

Filed under: Best Practices | Comments Off on Being in the Moment with our Students

Thanks to all our wonderful readers and contributors, we WON!

Posted on January 9, 2015 by Mary A. Lynch

“Best Practices for Legal Education” blog won first place in the ABA Journal Blawg 100’s Careers / Law School category. Our blog garnered more than 150 votes and was one of 13 popular vote winners out of 100 blogs.

The Blawg 100, as selected by the ABA Journal, was featured in the journal’s December 2014 cover story. As a winner of the popular vote, “Best Practices for Legal Education” will be featured again in the February issue.  The ABA Journal‘s Blawg 100 is an annual list of the best in blogs about lawyers and the law.

We also have a cool new BADGE featured on our site! Booyah!

A special thank you to Michele Pistone of LegalEd  for her great work on getting out the vote!

So keep those contributions, posts and comments coming!

 

Filed under: Catalysts For Change, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Building on Best Practices for Legal Education Manuscript Submitted to Publisher

Posted on January 8, 2015 by dmaranville

Four editors,  59 authors, 92 readers, three copy editors, librarians from two schools, a secretary, miscellaneous consultants, three student assistants for bluebooking, and one for setting up perrmacc links.*

Many people, occasionally in multiple roles, were needed to produce the manuscript sent to Lexis last Monday for the forthcoming book Deborah Maranville, Lisa Radtke Bliss, Carolyn Wilkes Kaas, and Antoinette Sedillo López (eds.),  Building on Best Practices:  Transforming Legal Education in a Changing World. (Lexis 2015).  A monster project — but, as I assured a friend, no, not a manuscript about monsters and not monstrously unpleasant to produce – just big, ambitious, and sometimes exhausting for the editors and authors.  A big thank you to all who participated!

The book is a follow up to CLEA’s Best Practices for Legal Education, the 2007 volume by Roy Stuckey and others that inspired this blog.  Like Best Practices, this book will be distributed for free to legal educators.  Lexis has promised to make it available in electronic format through their e-book library and to provide print copies on request.  Look for it in four to six months — if all goes smoothly perhaps in time for the AALS Clinical Legal Education Conference in early May.

The coverage of Building on Best Practices is wide-ranging.  To quote from the Introduction, “[t]his volume builds on the call to link mission and outcomes; emphasizing the themes of integrating theory, doctrine and practice, developing the broader spectrum of skills needed by lawyers in the twenty-first century, and taking up the question how best to shift law school cultures to facilitate change.”

Advance praise for the book has included:

  • “[M]ilestone in legal education . . . that legal educators will rely on as much as . . . on the first Best Practices book.”  (Patty Roberts, William & Mary)
  • “Educational for folks who don’t know much about experiential education and insightful for those who do. . . .Really something to be proud of . . . an invaluable resource to schools as they go to work on implementing the ABA’s new requirements for learning outcomes and assessment. . .The perfect product coming out at the perfect time.” (Kate Kruse, Hamline)

Once again, CLEA deserves kudos for its support of an important scholarly project on legal education.  And the Georgia State University, University of New Mexico, Quinnipiac University, and University of Washington Law Schools deserve a big round of thanks for supporting the co-editors in this project.

*  https://perma.cc/ provides an archive for those annoying website links that quickly become outdated.

Filed under: Best Practices, Best Practices & Curriculum, Best Practices & Externships, Best Practices & Setting Goals, Best Practices and Clinics, Best Practices for Institutional Effectiveness, Catalysts For Change, Diversity & Social Justice, International Initiatives and Models | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

« Previous Page — Next Page »