A Modest Proposal (for more coordination)

I recently attended the Emory Transactional Law conference (which was excellent, as always).  The conference is held every two years; this was their fifth.  Earlier in the spring semester, while I was putting together my talk (on What Law School Curriculum Committees Can Learn From Architecture Schools) I noticed that the Institute for Law Teaching and Learning 2016 conference would be going on at the same time, as well as the Third National Symposium on Experiential Learning in Law.

There are differences in emphasis among the three conferences.  But it’s fair to say that most, if not all, of the attendees at all three events are in what might be termed the “reform wing” of legal education.  While the ideas being circulated at all three conferences may be familiar to most readers of this blog, and while those ideas are being incorporated into law school curriculums throughout the country, the reform movement (broadly construed) still does not command a majority position in legal education.  So I have to ask – why would three such conferences be scheduled at the same time?  I know there is no commissioner or czar of legal education, let alone a single leader of each of the various components of the reform movement.  I also know that with the limited travel budgets many professors have, attending more than one conference in a year might be out of reach.  But I wonder if there isn’t some way to better coordinate scheduling of such conferences for those who would want to attend more than one of them.  I don’t know who put their marker down first, and I don’t know if any of the players knew of what the others were planning.  But perhaps more coordination, and more deference to others, might have been in order.

Spliddit.org

For professors assigning group work for credit, there is a website that can help allocate the share of credit to be given to each person. It’s called Spliddit (spliddit.org), and was developed by a Carnegie Mellon computer scientist. The idea is not ‘about doing the calculations for you, it’s about using a fair method that you probably wouldn’t have thought about yourself.” As described in a campus publication explaining the site, “the algorithm…works by asking each contributor to ignore his or her own effort and instead assess how much each of the other colleagues contributed to the final product.”

As more and more professors utilize group work in their classes, this website could be of great utility. While I have not used it myself, and while we know many law professors and many law students are mathaverse, it may be worth a look, especially since it doesn’t actually require the professor or the student do actually do or understand higher mathermatics.

Innovative licensing of architects – a model for the legal profession?

While many who comment about the design of legal education look to medical schools, it seems to me that architecture schools provide another useful model. The architecture curriculum integrates classroom instruction with a central role for the studio (the equivalent of simulation or clinical work in law school), and the review of student work (also called critique or “crit”) is central to the studio. There may be lessons to be learned.
Now an alternative method of licensure (similar to the Daniel Webster Scholars Program in New Hampshire, but on a larger scale) is being considered:
NCARB Endorses New Path to Becoming an Architect:  Architect Licensure Upon Graduation

Incorporating internship and examination requirements into university education, the regulatory organization aims to simplify and accelerate the licensing process.

30 May 2014
Washington, DC—The National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) Board of Directors has announced their endorsement of the concept of an additional, structured path that leads to licensure in a U.S. jurisdiction. The new path—licensure upon graduation from an accredited program—would integrate the rigorous internship and examination requirements that aspiring architects must fulfill into the years spent completing a professional degree in architecture.
The concept was designed by a distinguished group of volunteers convened by NCARB, which recommends national architect registration standards, called the Licensure Task Force. This group, which was initially formed in mid-2013, is headed by NCARB’s Immediate Past President Ron Blitch of Louisiana, and it includes former and current leaders of NCARB, the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB), the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Association of Colleges and Schools of Architecture (ACSA), and the American Institute of Architecture Students (AIAS), as well as interns, recently licensed architects, program deans and instructors, and jurisdictional licensing board representatives.
A Progressive Path
Describing the work of the Licensure Task Force, NCARB CEO Michael Armstrong said, “NCARB is engaged in streamlining and simplifying the licensing process for aspiring architects, and we are actively re-engineering all elements of the architectural licensing process—education, experience and examination—to focus on facilitation of licensing.”
“This additional path to licensure is another concrete step to reimagining and reconfiguring each part of the process while upholding the rigorous standards needed to protect the public’s health, safety and welfare,” he said.
This progressive concept was borne of research and development efforts by the Licensure Task Force, with leaders from diverse segments of the architectural community to analyze each component of the licensure process to identify overlaps and redundancies to existing programs.
Now beginning the second year, the Licensure Task Force will start to identify schools interested in participating in the program. NCARB expects to issue schools Requests for Information later in the year, followed by a Request for Proposal process in 2015.
Exam Evolution
In addition to the licensure work, NCARB also announced this month that a transition plan is underway to guide the implementation of major improvements and changes to the Architect Registration Examination® (ARE®), the test that all prospective architects must take to get their licenses. The new ARE 5.0 will launch in late 2016, while ARE 4.0 will remain available for at least 18 months after the launch.
The exam is required by all U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands for initial architectural licensure by assessing candidates for their knowledge, skills, and ability to provide all services required in the practice of architecture.

 

The Future of Education: Lessons Learned from Video Games and Museum Exhibits

Here’s an interesting take on education from Don Norman. He is an academic in the field of cognitive science, design and usability engineering, and the author of several books, including The Design of Everyday Things. This address was to graduates of a School of Education and Social Policy, but includes some ideas that may provoke thought in law schools as well.

The Future of Education: Lessons Learned from Video Games and Museum Exhibits

Don Norman

COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND SOCIAL POLICY: June 2001

You chose a great year to graduate. Education is in the news The President of the United States is for it. The House & Senate just passed new education bills.

Education is hot in business as well. The rise of corporate universities is well established, with companies literally spending billions of dollars to educate their employees. Education is now a business, with multiple companies offering courses and degrees as a successful, profit-making business.

Of course, one of the problems when everyone is for something is that everyone has a different idea of what it is that they are for. Everyone who is for education seems to have a different idea of what to do, hence the challenge. The one thing everyone agrees upon is that our educational system is in trouble. Something has to be done to fix it. But what?

To me, anything that is truly worthwhile is something that is also a major challenge. If you were facing an easy task, why bother? So it’s a great year to be graduating, for anything truly worthwhile, anything that will make a difference, not just to you, but to many, is going to be hard. This is a great year, for there are great challenges ahead of you.

Education Throughout Life

We will solve the fundamental problems only through social policy, through organizational change, and through deep understanding of organizations and the people who comprise and are served by them. We need to change the way we think about education, and through that understanding, change the way we do it.

One erroneous notion is that education only takes place in the classroom, mostly through books and lectures. The basic recipe for education of a nation is very simple:

Take young children:

* Open up the tops of their heads
* Pour in all the information they are ever going to need to know to get along with life
* Continue as long as possible — for 12 to 20 years

Now let them loose upon society, to spend the next 60 – 80 years as productive citizens, never having to be educated again.

A very simple scheme, practiced by nations throughout the world. Simple, and simple-minded.

This standard practice is wrong for lots of reasons. It concentrates all the learning into one period, when the students are not interested, when they don’t care, when they are not ready. It assumes that what is learned today will be available when needed, many years later. And it ignores the powerful social impact of groups, social discussion, and cooperation.

Most of our lives is spent interacting with others. Most of our work is done jointly. In the workplace, we are encouraged to ask others for help. When we do not know the answer to something, we are free to ask for help, to form groups.

Indeed, one of the few places where solitary work is required is in the classroom.

Informal Learning

Informal learning, that’s what we call the learning that takes place out of school. I just spent a day at the Science Museum in London where the staff prided themselves on the social interaction among the museum goers. To me, the most fascinating exhibit was a simple quiz game.

People sat around a circular table, each seat having a button to push, and a dish-size disk they could spin. A computer projector was directly overhead, projecting an image on the table, displaying the game and, on top of each dish and button, whatever meaning it was meant to have at that moment.

So, not only was the technological wonderful — interacting with a computer without being stuck in front of a big screen, keyboard, and mouse, but the game was fascinating.

The table image explained some new technological concept, say the ability to embed chips in children, so that satellite systems could track them and parents would always know where their kids were. The fun began with the quiz: Is this a good idea? Should parents be allowed to do this? Would kids allow it?

You spun the plate to select the answer you wanted to give, then pushed the button. But the clever part was that everyone could see everyone else’s answer, so that the participants would start discussing the issues with one another, sometimes friends against friends, sometimes one group of strangers with another, sometimes parents with their children. (Footnote: Link to London Science Museum website.)

(My photograph of the game at the London Science Museum, taken June, 2001. Only 2 people playing [my photography got in the way]. Click hereor on the picture to see a larger image. The projector is above, pointing down at the table [and not visible in this picture]. The game has 8 playing positions: Note “turn” instructions centered over the rotating dish.)

So, here is a simple game, motivating, interesting. It imparts some real knowledge, and afterwards, the participants can discuss and debate it.

It uses high-technology, but intelligently. It doesn’t flaunt the technology — in fact, participants don’t think of it as technology, they think of it as fun, a quiz where they learn, that they enjoy, and that they recommend to their friends. Notice too that the procedure exploits social interaction. There you go: exams that teach, technology that is hidden, exploiting social interaction and discussion.

ESPN Zone

Look at another form of informal learning: Video games. The other day I visited the ESPN Zone on Ohio St. in Chicago. Now that’s an interesting place — I commend it to you. Filled with machines, filled with games, filled with people — of all ages. It’s all voluntary. In fact, people pay a lot of money to participate. Imagine — paying money to learn! They are engaged, intense, involved. They are performing, playing, competing. And most of all they are learning.

Children, we are told, have short attention spans, caused, of course, by the prevalence of games and TV and commercials in our society.

Nonsense.

Watch people at video games. You can’t tear them away. More importantly, they truly are exercising their minds. They problem-solve. They take notes, read books of hints and strategy. They save the game state, try out a new course of action, and if it doesn’t work, return to the saved game state. And they form social communities, sharing hints, tips, and methods. Many of you will understand, for you do it too.

Video games aren’t restricted to children. Today, the average age of a game player is pretty much the average age of the population, and women play almost as often as men. Different games, perhaps, but games nonetheless.

The only problem with games is that the skills are either for make-believe worlds, often violent, or for sports: skate boarding, skiing, tennis, baseball, football, motorcycling. Nothing wrong with sports, and as the games get better and better, controlled by real skateboards, motorcycles, and so on, they can be quite effective at teaching the skills required to do the real thing. The military uses games in real training, as does the aviation industry, except they don’t call them games, they call them “simulators.” One person’s simulator is another person’s game. The important point is that they teach: effectively, efficiently, and well. And students enjoy them.

“But,” you may be saying, “that’s all very well for simple things, or for sports, but what about for learning the really hard stuff, subjects that take time to master and that are more abstract, such as writing, literature, history, or math?” I believe the same principles apply to almost any topic. Obviously one game does not fit all people or all topics. But any time you get this amount of interest, this amount of sustained, concentrated attention, it is worthy of study. Actually, there already are a number of examples of games that help teach literature or arithmetic, city planning or evolution, history or geography. We need a lot more sustained research and development of these ideas (and note that development is always more expensive and, in some ways much more difficult, than research).

We, as a nation, don’t spend anywhere near the amount on education that we spend on games. And we don’t get the same kind of energy, of commitment, and of excitement that we find on the game field.

The Lessons from Science Museums and Computer Games

Museums and video arcades exploit similar themes: meaningful activities, learning that takes place invisibly, not as the objective, but naturally, effectively. Exploiting social interaction and discussion. Participants don’t think of themselves as interacting with technology, they think they are doing something interesting: discussing an interesting topic, playing basketball, riding a jet-ski, skateboarding. They exploit social interaction and cooperation. The result is high intense concentration, true learning, with people anxious to go back and do it again, paying for it out of their own money.

People learn many things, if only they care about the topic. People are hungry for learning, as long as it isn’t called education. Hence book groups, discussion groups, and clubs of all sorts.

The future of education is outside of education. It is in the everyday life. In business, in the world. In life long learning. But the principles can be applied inside of formal education as well. They require a change in thinking, to move toward problem-centered, meaningful activities in the classroom. To exploit people’s interests and subvert them to lead to natural, inspired learning activities. To exploit group interactions and social themes. To change teachers into guides and mentors. And to recognize that education should take place over a lifetime, not just in the formal classrooms of the first few decades of life.

You already know all that, right? That’s exactly what you have just been taught. The hard part is making it happen, and that’s where you will need all the skills you have learned: social change, social policy, human psychology, and human development. It is not going to be easy.

Wonderful! Nothing like important challenges to get you going, eh?

A GREAT YEAR TO GRADUATE

Change is never easy. It will take a long time. People are very slow to adopt change, especially in things they consider fundamental to their lives. Studies of the adoption of new technologies and procedures show them to take decades to be adopted, whether it be a new consumer technology, a new type of seed or fertilizer. Adopting new methods of education will be even more difficult, even slower to be adopted. But even educational systems change eventually.

One way that the personal computer got into the workplace — over the objections of the information technology groups in companies — was because people used computers in the classroom or at home, discovered how valuable they were, and then sneaked them into corporations.

Why not the same thing in education?

You are graduating from a very unique school. At first glance, it brings together a strange mix of disciplines: education, social policy, organizational change, human development, and several areas of applied psychology. It is a strange mix, but, in fact, it is exactly right, for these areas are all inextricably mixed in the real world of business, education, and everyday life. Real issues never exist in a vacuum. They live in the world of policy, of social practices, of organizations, and of people. If one is to make any progress at all in these matters, one must combine these very disciplines, plus perhaps even a few others, such as technology and business. It is no accident that your faculty have appointments in computer science and close ties to the business school.

The academic education is only the first step toward change: the further steps are up to you. You are the agents of change. You can indeed help make the world a better place, a more intelligent, social place.

It is not going to be easy. It is going to be hard work. And it will take time. It will be a challenge.

So hurry up and start: the sooner you start, the sooner we will get there. And you can literally save the country, save the world.

Harvard Law’s Curricular Reform: 3 Years In

This was recently posted on PrawfsBlog by Glen Cohen.

Several years ago, under the stewardship of then-dean Kagan and then-professor-now-dean Minow, Harvard Law School made a significant change to its first year curriculum. Different portions were phased in at different times, but this will be the third full year of it all being in place, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to discuss the reforms. Unlike the Langdellian Socratic method that was also started at Harvard, I have seen less copying of our reforms. That may be that others do not think it a good idea, but I suspect it is more to do with the fact that this was a resource intensive change (adding an additional 21 professors needed to teach 1Ls) that was implemented at a moment where most schools are facing economic woes.

Here is the reform in a nutshell:

The typical Harvard 1st year courses (Civ Pro, Contracts, Torts, Property, Criminal Law) were all dropped from 5 credit hours a week to 4 credit hours.  An additional 4-credit class entitled “Legislation and Regulation,” which largely combines a course in legislation/statutory interpretation with parts of administrative law was added.  In addition, a 4-credit international/comparative law elective was required and added to the first year curriculum. Students choose from a menu of seven classes for 1Ls with foci such as private international, public international law, international humanitarian law, an comparative law (China, for example).  Last, and most recently, we moved our finals into the fall and now give the 1Ls a winter (or J-) term class called “Problem Solving Workshop,” which is taught intensively over 13 week days. Each day the students are given a problem, and in small groups have a day or two to solve it and submit work product as a group. While some of the problems are focused on litigation, others are things like dealing with public relations and media, negotiating, and other skills. The next day the students re-assemble, debrief and consider how different groups dealt with the problem, and start a new problem. The course is pass/fail. Once in the middle of the class and once at the end the students meet with practicing lawyers to test their proposed solutions against the practical realities as the lawyers see it.

Students also take a regular elective in the spring.

Here is my internal sense of how these have been received, but one reason why I want to post about it is to get feedback from those of you in the world out there who have seen our students under the new curriculum and their performance.

Click here for the rest of the article.

NALP’s Findings on Experiential Learning and Law Practice

NALP recently posted its “2010 Survey of Law School Experiential Learning Opportunities and Benefits”.

Here is the executive summary.  Some of what is in the survey will be familiar or predictable to readers of this blog, but I think there are a few surprises as well:

Executive Summary

“Hands-on learning (skills courses, judicial internships, clinics, etc.) are the most effective preparation for law practice.”

“I benefitted most from situations in law school that let me learn in real life and real time.”

Much debate has ensued during the last few years regarding the effectiveness of law school in preparing new lawyers for the practice of law and the advantages of experiential learning opportunities offered during law school. The data from this study suggest that some, if not all, of these “hands-on” or simulated learning opportunities, whether required or optional, are indeed instrumental in preparing new associates for the demands of the practice of law. The respondents, all associates in private law firms, provided a new view of some of the various experiential opportunities offered in law schools, and of whether these experiences affected their development and preparedness as a lawyer.

Participation in and Benefits of Legal Clinics

Slightly under one-third (30.2%) of the survey respondents reported that they had participated in at least one legal clinic during law school. Within this group, 63.1% rated these clinics “very useful” using a scale of 1 to 4 (with 1 being “not useful at all” and 4 being “very useful”). Only 3.9% of the respondents in this group rated the clinics as “not useful at all.”

Participation in and Benefits of Externships/Field Placements

Tracking similarly to participation in legal clinics, 36.2% of the associate respondents reported having taken part in an externship or field placement during law school. Not surprisingly, participation in these programs increased for students who attended law school in metropolitan areas with populations over 100,000. Overall, roughly 3 out of 5 (60.1%) associates who reported participating in at least one externship or field placement rated the experience as “very useful.”

Participation in and Benefits of Practice Skills Courses

The majority (70.1%) of the responding associates reported that they had taken at least one practice skills course during law school, with 40% reporting that they had taken three or more practice skills courses. The most common practice skills course taken by this group was Trial Advocacy. Surprisingly, the data reveal that the associates who reported participating in at least one of these courses considered them to be only moderately useful. Unlike the usefulness rating reported by associates who had participated in legal clinics and/or externships, only 35.8% considered their practice skills course(s) to be “very useful.”

Participation in and Benefits of Pro Bono Work During Law School

The data reveal striking differences when it comes to participation in and usefulness of pro bono work during law school compared to other experiential or “hands-on” learning opportunities. The vast majority of respondents (88.3%) reported that pro bono work during law school was not required. Within the group who reported doing pro bono work, either voluntarily or as part of a curriculum requirement, over half (59.3%) said that they performed fewer than 40 hours of pro bono work during their law school tenure. When asked to rate the general usefulness of pro bono work in preparing them for private practice, associates ranked the experience(s) significantly lower, an average of 2.2 on a scale of 1 to 4 (with 1 being “not at all useful” and 4 being “very useful”), compared to the overall usefulness ratings of legal clinics (an average of 3.4), externships or field placements (an average of 3.4), and skills courses (an average of 3.1).

The full report is available at http://www.nalp.org/uploads/2010ExperientialLearningStudy.pdf

The Teacher’s Manual – What Is Important?

I imagine some of the readers of this blog have opinions as to what makes a good teacher’s manual.  Here’s a chance to express yourself in a poll on the Faculty Lounge blog. Voting is open until February 16 at noon.

Movable Walls

In May, I participated in the Bricks, Bytes and Continuous Renovation conference in Philadelphia, where law school classroom design was discussed (as well as law school building design in general).  The article below, which originally appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education, raises some interesting thoughts along those lines.  I doubt there are many law school deans ready to embrace the idea proposed in the article.  But as law schools build for the future (literally as well as figuratively) we need to give more thought to the spatial implications of implementing best teaching practices.  I imagine (hope?) most schools do seek the input of clinicians when planning a new facility.  But what about spaces other than the clinic itself?  Are schools locking themselves into less-than-optimal classroom designs, by just trying to build a spiffier, better-lit version of the traditional classroom?  Or are law schools thinking seriously about the kinds of teaching and other spaces needed in the 21st century?  To give one example – a common objection to doing break-out groups is that they can’t work in large classes.  And the traditional large, tiered classroom is perceived to be a further impediment.  Those of us who have tried it know that neither the number of students nor the size or layout off the classroom prevents the use of this technique.  But wouldn’t it be even better if best practices were taken into account during the design process for any new or renovated law school building?  Another example would be whether/how law schools are designing spaces to encourage collaboration.  I’m sure other professors know of many other examples; those teachers need to be heard when new or renovated law school space is being designed. 

Wall-E: Reconfigurable Walls at Stanford d.school Make Each Class the Perfect Size
BY Linda Tischler
Wed Apr 28, 2010

Chronicle of Higher Education

Can classroom design influence the quality of learning? Anybody who’s sat in the back row of a big lecture hall with empty seats up front can tell you it’s a perfect setup for disengagement–or for updating your Facebook page.

It’s a problem central to space design at the new Stanford d.school building, and one that planners solved with a massively reconfigurable wall system that lets instructors create the perfectly sized space for each class.

The school’s second floor is, essentially, one large room, framed by a truss system that lets planners design a series of sliders, attached with a gizmo they call a “taco” to a beam-mounted C-channel. That allows teams to create instant studios, of the exact dimensions appropriate to the day’s activities. Need a cozy nook? Done! A wide-open expanse of space? Not a problem.

Additional support is provided by spring-loaded posts, which let classes put wall studs wherever they want.

“The system allows a modal shift between intimate and open,” says Scott Witthoff, co-director with Scott Doorley of the school’s Environments Collaborative, which designed the arrangement along with Dave Shipmen of Steelcase.

Check out the taco itself: it’s subtly branded with an abstracted “d” cutout as an extra, usable hole. That’s also part of the d.school ethos, to expose how things are put together. That ranges from a support wall that exposes the masonry, brick, and stucco of the building’s previous lives to the edges on the tables that show their composition.

The dschool’s DNA is, after all, engineering, so the feeling that it’s all like something out of David Macauley’s “The Way Things Work” is no accident.

Using Innovative Teaching Materials

 
 

Here is a recent entry on the Law School Innovation blog dealing with teaching materials. It is a reminder of one of the barriers to implementing best practices. This is particularly relevant to encouraging newer colleagues to incorporate best practices. For many, supplementing an existing casebook with additional materials will be a less perfect, but more achievable, method:
  

 
 


Pro or Con- texts?
  

Over the past three years, I have taught over 20 classes, in six different subjects. In that time, I did not use a single traditional textbook. This wasn’t done out of some revulsion at cost or content; rather, I found that texts simply did not fit well into the practice-oriented classes I was teaching. For example, I teach a class in Appeals and Habeas, and certainly there are books that cover each of those subjects. However, I was combining Texas appellate procedure with federal and state habeas and focusing on how those systems operate, and never found a text that fit those needs.  

I’m starting to see signs, though, that the textbook industry is adjusting to the reality of practice-oriented classes. My classmate Sarah Ricks, now teaching at Rutgers-Camden, is one of those in the middle of that movement. She has developed a text to be released later this year by Carolina Academic Press entitled Current Issues in Constitutional Litigation: Roles of the Courts, Attorneys, and Administrators. Like my appeals and habeas class (and, overlapping with that class), Constitutional litigation is by its nature practice-oriented. Prof. Ricks’ book accommodates that reality by incorporating non-case material including not only simulation exercises (a device that has been used often), but appellate briefs, oral arguments, and expert reports, to focus more sharply on the role of the practitioner. Multimedia material includes the testimony of a prison guard accused of assault of a prisoner, and interviews with some prison rape victims.  

I would like to use a textbook—it is a pain in the neck to assemble new materials every time I start teaching a new class. The work of people like Prof. Ricks gives me hope that in the future there may be a textbook that fits my class and style.  

— Mark Osler
Reposted from: http://lsi.typepad.com/lsi/  

 

 

First Day

Ah, the first day of law school. The 1Ls are ready to go. Orientation may have fed some of their apprehensions, but it’s also gotten them excited about beginning their law school journey. The returning 2Ls and 3Ls have done a variety of things over the summer. Their experiences in many cases have given them new-found motivation (though that doesn’t necessarily mean they are all thrilled to be back at school).
But what to do on the first day of class? At Elon, we have a two-day “boot camp” as part of orientation. So every 1L has had a classroom introduction to each first year subject, and they’ve even written several mini-exam answers so they begin to see what the enterprise of legal analysis is about. And in my case, having taught the boot camp session on torts, I’ve already met with all the 1Ls (including the students I will have in my section. So a little bit of the ice has already been broken; they’ve already met with me (and several of their other professors) before the first “official” day of their law school careers.
Even with this run-up, there are still so many things a professor wants to impart on the first day. There are obvious logistical and housekeeping announcements. Even if they are covered in the syllabus, it’s usually a good thing to go over the most important ones in class. Over time I have become more and more convinced that making expectations clear and beginning to demonstrate how to approach legal problems is a good thing to do. Of course I don’t expect students to “get it” the first time it’s put out there – element analysis, applying facts to rules, etc. If they did, we wouldn’t need to spend an entire year doing the first year of law school. But the sooner they can begin to see what the expectations are at the end of the semester, even if at first their approach is mechanical, the more efficient all of their studying and preparation will be. At SEALS a couple of months ago, at one of the sessions I attended a professor said that on the first day he shows students what an exam question and a good answer look like. I have never gone quite that far – for one thing, I think it might be too intimidating. But the mini-exam hypos our students do in boot camp allow me to begin talking to first –year students from the very start about how to “reverse engineer” back from the ultimate result to what their notes and outline will have to include to get them there.
Having said that, and recognizing that there is so much we want to tell them, I strongly believe in “doing some law school” the first day. So regardless of where we are in the introductory material, at some point on the first day I want to make sure we begin to discuss a case. Too much talk of abstract concepts, process points or general themes can overwhelm 1Ls, especially when they haven’t yet read any cases.
One more point – also suggested by someone at SEALS. One nice, simple way to start a conversation about teaching among colleagues is to pose the question, “What do you do on the first day of class?”. Great idea. So give it some thought – what do you do? And why?