Teaching, Technology, and Eckstein Hall

There is convergence of ideas about teaching and technology around the Law School lately. The Law School is holding idea sessions as part of our strategic planning process.  A significant part of the discussion involves teaching: effectiveness, learners, full and part-time education.  Earlier this week Douglas Fisher published an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education on “flipping” his database course at Vanderbilt. Flipping a course refers to taking the in-class lecture component and moving it to an online component, usually accomplished by recording the lecture. Earlier this summer I attended a presentation by Professor Norman Garland (Southwestern School of Law) who flipped his Evidence course and reported on the process and results. These threads all come together this week for me.

We haven’t flipped any classes here but we have blended (a term Garland prefers to flipping) a few. Some MULS faculty have been long time adopters of technology both in the classroom and outside. Many have electronic course pages, electronic supplements, electronic casebooks, and even video webcasts of course supplements. Several faculty here have blended some of their traditional in-class instruction with required out-of-class viewing of lectures. The MULS faculty who have blended their classes use the out-of-class lecture to establish the basics of the topic, which means in-class instruction can focus less on establishing the topic and more about exploring its nuances and its applications.

Continue ReadingTeaching, Technology, and Eckstein Hall

Counselor at Risk: Does Specialization Threaten the Attorney’s Function as Counselor?

Many law firm shingles still read “Attorneys and Counselors at Law.”  Each term carries with it a distinct meaning and independent importance in the legal profession.  Do we risk marginalizing the counselor role as we strive to achieve efficiencies in the delivery of legal services through specialization?  And if so, why does it matter?

Lawyers are trained to analyze the law and to prepare legal documents; however, in order to provide effective legal advice, and in order to exercise their highest and best use in our justice system, lawyers must possess much more than technical knowledge and skills.  Lawyers must also be able to fulfill their roles as counselors.  This requires that they be able to craft creative solutions, sustain client morale during difficult times, and to offer wisdom and sound judgment, not just knowledge.  (See, e.g., Anthony L. Cochran, They Don’t Call Us “Counselor” For Nothing.)

Continue ReadingCounselor at Risk: Does Specialization Threaten the Attorney’s Function as Counselor?

Inherently Subversive Pedagogy

In 2010 the Arizona legislature created a law designed to deter the teaching of a Mexican American Studies course in Tucson schools by cutting State funding to districts with courses that, among other things, “promote resentment toward a race or class of people.”  After a finding by the state court in 2011 and under the threat of a $15 million fine, the Tucson district was forced to stop utilizing a course that was available to all students, was effectively closing the achievement gap, and was successful in helping Latino students attend college.  One aspect of enforcement that the district decided on was banning the use of many books that were a part of the Mexican American Studies program from schools.

I was introduced to the Tucson curriculum issue in Professor Mazzie’s first semester Legal Analysis, Research, and Writing 1 class last fall.  Our assignment was to write a brief memo on whether the Tucson course was in violation of A.R.S. § 15-112.  The constitutionality of the Arizona law itself has since been called into question under the purview of a federally appointed special master who is overseeing the Tucson School District’s mandated desegregation.  It was satisfying to see, earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agree with my position in Professor Mazzie’s class that the curriculum was not necessarily a per se violation of A.R.S. § 15-112 anyway.

Continue ReadingInherently Subversive Pedagogy