|
AdamCarlis-SecondPaper 19 - 24 Apr 2008 - Main.OluwafemiMorohunfola
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | |
-- BarbPitman - 23 Apr 2008 | |
>
> |
In response to Barb, I also haven't taken a clinic yet, but i've talked to a number of 3Ls who say that it is an invaluable experience and NO ONE should leave here without taking as many clinics as they can. Having not taken a clinic, i can't but wonder why the classroom isn't more like the clinics. As interesting as these threads are, there are some questions we shouldn't assume we can answer until we've been through the whole process. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that. But, if i'm to guess, i'll assume that it's like public speaking classes i took in undergrad. Maybe we have to learn it on paper and in theory before we start practicing it. It might be useful to not let 1Ls take clinics. But, like i said, i don't know.
In response to andrew, http://xkcd.com/263/ Nuff said
Math and Philosophy have nothing in common. They're two extremes on the spectrum from the closest we can get to universal truths to the closest we can get to total subjectivity. Ask yourself why the Socratic Method was designed by a Philosopher?
I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with the teaching here. I think the teachers need to seriously reexamine what they want to do and how they want to do it. However, i don't want the law shoved down my throat like math. Go too far in that direction and you get the opposite of what Eben aims for: Free thinking attorneys with their own conception of what legal problems need solution and the creativity to find those solutions. Figuring out a way to make law school teaching effective is not so simple as applying what we know in other areas. Here we have different objectives and we'll need complex and different solutions. That's all i was trying to say. Law is harder to teach than math, and it's in our interest that they not be taught exactly the same.
-- OluwafemiMorohunfola - 24 Apr 2008 | | | |
|
|
AdamCarlis-SecondPaper 18 - 23 Apr 2008 - Main.BarbPitman
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | There's a science to teaching everything, we just need to learn what it is. You can teach philosophy the same way you teach math, as long as you know how philosophy is different from math. Your comment sounds frighteningly like "legal magic."
-- AndrewGradman - 23 Apr 2008 | |
>
> |
Adam, good question. I gather that the multistate performance test portion of the bar requires a functional process that is somewhat similar to the actual practice of law. If that process could be broken down and taught in units, I think it could be similar to a clinical experience, but without the added dynamics of direct client contact. However, I think that there are some longstanding and well-ingrained views that will continue to work against (both actively and through inertia) an integration of clinical-type experience and subject matter coursework, at least in the near future. For one, it’s less threatening to the structure of the regular curriculum and the teachers who teach it to keep the clinics and externships as separate entities apart from the subject-matter classes. Plus, the image of a law school as being a professional graduate experience would be threatened by the integration of classes that would likely be viewed as more vocational and technical in nature. I also think that the legal industry has always assumed, if not accepted, that people come out of law school with not much practical experience, so firms understand that the practicum learning curve continues alongside the learning curve associated with the subject matter that makes up your eventual area of expertise.
Although I’ve obviously never taken a clinic, I gather that the additional dimension of direct client contact in clinics is very helpful and eye-opening. But if you are going into private practice at a firm, and you end up doing little if any pro bono work, then client interactions are largely a moot point in the beginning (you will probably at most sit in on conference calls). And once client contact becomes a part of your day, you will probably find that, at least in private practice, the nature of your interaction with clients and the needs of those clients are very different from the needs of and interactions with clinical and externship clients. Keep in mind that my perspective is heavily influenced by large (400-attorney), non-national Midwest firm culture (basically what Makalika refers to in the “Questions that Need Answers” thread), so you should take all the above with that backdrop in mind, although I still think my points are basic enough that they are applicable to national markets as well.
-- BarbPitman - 23 Apr 2008 | | | |
|
|
AdamCarlis-SecondPaper 17 - 23 Apr 2008 - Main.AndrewGradman
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | Barb, why don't clinic's take place "in the classroom"?
-- AdamCarlis - 22 Apr 2008 | |
>
> |
This is a great essay. I think legal education needs to critically examine itself. I hope you can get it to do that.
Femi--you said,
I'm not convinced that teaching law is the same as teaching math. I don't think you can teach philosophy the same way as you can teach math. The Premise of all the legal realism stuff we read at the beginning of the semester implies that understanding the law is a little like understanding the soft sciences, and people do develop different conceptions and different understandings of different things in the law.
There's a science to teaching everything, we just need to learn what it is. You can teach philosophy the same way you teach math, as long as you know how philosophy is different from math. Your comment sounds frighteningly like "legal magic."
-- AndrewGradman - 23 Apr 2008 | | | |
|
|
AdamCarlis-SecondPaper 16 - 22 Apr 2008 - Main.AdamCarlis
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| |
<
< | [ I have cleaned up the copy I used to make editorial
marks. ] | | | Teaching Lawyers
Introduction | |
<
< | Columbia is blessed with faculty committed to teaching, but cursed by dreadful instruction. As a former teacher and trainer of teachers and their managers, I am confident that our professors posses the ability and desire to do great things in their classrooms. Unfortunately, they lack foundational elements necessary to ensure student success.
- I think the phrase "lack foundational elements" might be understood as precisely the sort of personal criticism you are striving to avoid. These guys don't lack foundational anything, I believe is sort of your very polite claim. They just don't have the right context in which to bring their lucid and powerful minds to bear.
| >
> | Columbia is blessed with committed faculty, yet cursed by dreadful instruction. As a former teacher and trainer of teachers, I am confident our professors posses the ability and desire to be successful instructors. They need only the appropriate framework through which to approach the task. | | | The Ideal
Vision, Assessment, and Planning (VAP) | |
<
< | Teach For America, after investigating successful classroom instruction, found that student achievement is predicated upon (1) a vision (2) aligned plans and (3) strong assessments.
- You might want to point out that this isn't rocket science. It's an attempt to reduce the basics of what we know from our attempts to learn what actually works in classrooms, and it's not different if you're trying to teach people (1) reading, (2) how to run a nuclear submarine, and (3) how to be effective negotiators in the course of diplomatic relations. There is some tendency among people who teach people how to be lawyers to disbelieve that effective ways of teaching second grade are either necessary or sufficient in law school.
| >
> | Teach For America, after investigating successful instruction, found student achievement to be predicated upon (1) vision (2) aligned plans and (3) useful assessments. This remains true regardless of grade level or subject matter. In fact, Teach For America uses the same framework to develop their staff as successful teachers use in their classrooms. | | | VAP in the Classroom | |
<
< | Clear goals are essential for student learning. Teachers must know exactly where they are going and what their students will know and be able to do when they get there. Otherwise, the classroom is aimless - often based on content coverage rather than student mastery. By itself, however, even an ambitious goal is insufficient. It must be broken down into units, weeks, classes, and activities – each aligned to the one before – so that every moment is used purposefully. Finally, assessments must be used both to gather information about student learning and to reveal teacher effectiveness: good teachers use assessments to improve their teaching.
- You might want to point out that the idea of disciplined teaching is not actually regarded anywhere as optional. Even if one's attitude about curricular delivery involved a different way of expressing the goals of the class and the means of attaining them, there should still be an accountable process for converting class minutes into progress towards goals.
| >
> | Goals are essential. Teachers must know exactly where they are going and what their students will know and be able to do when they get there. Otherwise, the classroom is aimless - often based on content coverage rather than student mastery. By itself, however, even an ambitious goal is insufficient. It must be broken down into units, classes, and activities – each aligned to the one before – so that every moment is purposeful. Finally, assessments must be used to both track student learning and reveal teacher effectiveness (good teachers use assessments to improve their teaching). Regardless of the particular approach to curricular delivery, teachers must be accountable to using precious class time to efficiently progress towards class goals. This framework makes that possible. | | | | |
<
< | Teaching as Leadership | >
> | Teaching as Leadership (TAL) | | | | |
<
< | This framework is not unique. It simply applies fundamental characteristics of strong leadership to the classroom. When Eben says “all it takes to achieve a goal is to know exactly what you want to accomplish and exactly how to get there,” he is articulating the same concept. When Barry Goldstein prepares a class action lawsuit, he first identifies the desired settlement and then traces back the steps required to get there. This is what leaders do. While thinking this way is unnatural to some, it can be taught, developed, and mastered. One can learn to be a leader. | >
> | TAL is not unique; rather it is an application of strong leadership to the classroom setting. When Eben says "all it takes to achieve a goal is to know exactly what you want to accomplish and exactly how to get there," he is articulating the same concept. When Barry Goldstein prepares a class action lawsuit, he first identifies the desired settlement and then traces back the steps required to get there. This is what leaders do. While thinking this way is unnatural to some, it can be taught, developed, and mastered. One can learn to be a leader. | | | Current Practice | |
<
< | Instruction at Columbia Law School Lacks Teacher Leadership.
I spoke with each of my professors about their (teaching) practice. Only one mentioned specific objectives for student learning. Others articulated broad goals around critical thinking or speaking, but nothing concrete. Their focus is content coverage not depth of understanding. This was true whether they taught 31 (or 14) students as well as 90. Success can happen in large or small class settings. What is necessary is not constant individual attention, but rather a strong sense of purpose that comes with working towards a meaningful goal.
- You might want to save words elsewhere to add some here. The form of the traditional law school course does not give the convened group any common purpose, despite the enormous technical improvements in collaboration now available. Using those tools, everyone in a large group is a potential front-rank collaborator, with no upper limit on the availability of engagement.
Assessment, too, is almost uniformly disastrous. Despite daily opportunities for informal assessment, syllabi are adjusted only due to time constraints. Where teachers should be determining student mastery and adjusting course, they are, instead, going through the motions of the Socratic Method, student by student, until they reach the end of their list. As a result, participation becomes an exercise in holding student attention rather than information gathering. | >
> | Lacking Teacher Leadership. | | | | |
<
< |
- This is the point set up above. Both syllabus and method are flawed by an absence of collaboration. It may not make complete sense to describe second grade as a work of collaboration between teacher and class, but in law school that should not only be a potential metaphor, but an actual reality.
| >
> | I spoke with each of my professors about their (teaching) practice. Only one mentioned specific objectives for student learning. Others articulated broad goals around critical thinking or speaking, but nothing concrete. Their focus is content coverage, not depth of understanding. This was true regardless of class size despite the fact that constant individual attention is unnecessary. Only the strong sense of purpose that comes with working towards a meaningful goal is required. | | | | |
<
< | As for planning, the syllabi we receive are not roadmaps from ignorance to content mastery, but checklists covering various topics within a doctrine. Forcing students to conform to generic plans, rather than adapting instruction to their needs, prevents the majority of students from maximizing their achievement. The “read the next three cases in the casebook” approach to curriculum mapping is evidence of a misunderstanding of purpose.
- Once again, this is actually a potential source of fruitful disagreement. Those who think students should follow the structure of doctrine as it is ideally supposed to be inferred from a reading of appellate decisions--though this is not actually the way they themselves think about the content of the law--may want to attempt a reasoned, principled defense of the forms of didactic material they not only use but also profitably help to create in proprietary form.
It is possible that the poor teaching during 1L year is due to instructor apathy. However, almost without exception, each of my professors has been committed to my learning. In fact, the great majority of them are teaching 1Ls particularly because they sought out the opportunity. Professors want us to do well and they want to help, they just don’t seem to know how.
| >
> | Assessment, too, is almost uniformly disastrous. Despite daily opportunities for informal assessment, syllabi are adjusted only due to time constraints. Teachers are not determining student mastery and adjusting course and so participation becomes an exercise in holding student attention rather than information gathering. | | | | |
>
> | As for planning, syllabi are not roadmaps from ignorance to content mastery, but checklists covering various topics within a doctrine. Forcing conformity to generic plans, rather than adapting instruction to student needs, retards student achievement. Activities must be designed to fill gaps in student understanding. This doesn’t require excising the case method. However, it does mean that each assignment must be purposefully selected based on its ability to move students towards class goals. | | | | |
>
> | It is possible that the poor teaching during 1L year is due to instructor apathy. However, almost without exception, each of my professors has been committed to my learning. In fact, the great majority of them are teaching 1Ls particularly because they sought out the opportunity. Professors want us to do well and they want to help, they just don’t always know how. | | | Improvement | |
<
< | We must provide an opportunity for Columbia’s committed instructors to align their practice with the teaching as leadership framework. The first step is to support those professors who are leaders in other aspects of their lives to apply leadership skills to their classrooms, while developing leadership in those whose leadership is dormant.
- This, I fear, cannot help but offend the amour propre of those who would be supposed, even at a stretch of imagination, not to be leaders. As well as fanning the antagonism against anyone who was anointed by this process as possessing leadership. Yet it must be said, somehow, I suppose.
| >
> | We must provide an opportunity for Columbia's committed instructors to align their practice to TAL. This requires creating space for faculty to apply to their classrooms the leadership skills they already use in other aspects of their lives as well as specifically developing those skills as they apply to education. | | | Quick Wins | |
<
< | First, I reject the idea that our professors do not take teaching seriously. Jack Greenberg, for example, doesn’t need to teach another day in his life. He is here because he enjoys it. The same can be said about most (all?) of his colleagues. Faculty members are accessible, if not eager to assist, and already spend time preparing for class. Just as colleges and grade schools provide professional development, we should, in addition to opportunities to discuss current developments in the law, create space for faculty to learn about current developments in education. Armed with the tools necessary to improve student learning across the board, many would take the initiative to adapt their practice: ensuring their ability lives up to their ambition.
- I think you would actually benefit substantially from leaving out anyone's name in that first sentence. Your argument is still profoundly and beneficially general.
| >
> | First, I reject the idea that our professors do not take teaching seriously. Our faculty members would excel practically anywhere in the legal profession. They don’t need to teach; they teach because they enjoy it. Faculty members are accessible, if not eager to assist, and already spend time preparing for class. Just as colleges and grade schools provide professional development, the law school should create space for faculty to learn about current developments in education. Armed with the tools necessary to improve student learning, many would take the initiative to adapt their practice: ensuring that their ability equals their ambition. | | | | |
>
> | Second, the curve masks teacher effectiveness. When every class has the same grade distribution, outcomes are not tied to teacher input. Grades should reflect how close students came to meeting ambitious classroom goals, therefore reflecting both student ability and teacher performance. A holistic approach to assessment is warranted. Professors should aggregate information about individual student achievement (class participation, written assignments, etc.) and compare it both to the class goal and the individual student’s baseline ability. If anonymity in formal assessment is insisted upon, designing assessments prior to instruction, aligning them to an objective rubric, and having a third party distribute grades should suffice. | | | | |
<
< | Second, the class curve masks teacher effectiveness. If every class has the same grade distribution, outcomes are not tied to teacher input. Grades should reflect how close students came to meeting ambitious classroom goals as both a reflection of student ability and teacher performance. Such a change would encourage teachers to ensure that every student reached their maximum potential without sacrificing the precise knowledge about individual achievement necessary to make judgments about a particular student’s work. A holistic approach to assessment is warranted. Professors should aggregate various information about individual student achievement (class participation, written assignments, etc.) and compare it both to the class goal and the individual student’s baseline ability. If anonymity in formal assessment is insisted upon, it can be done by designing assessments prior to instruction, aligning them to an objective rubric, and having a third party distribute grades.
- Ah, yes, that. It isn't going to be possible, and it's hardly necessary to provide a mechanism, but thank you for presenting one that could work, if only we didn't know themselves that we'd never abide by it.
Finally, the law school community must reward successful teachers as they do successful academics. Professors who mentor students into careers that suit their interests and desires should be celebrated.
- Too absurd to be thinkable.
| >
> | Third, collaboration must increase. Not only will this transform stale classroom environments into ones where student progress is easily identified and professor intervention can be targeted and effective, but, perhaps more importantly, it greatly increases opportunities for learning, builds skills necessary for success as a lawyer, helps to cement the necessary common purpose. These partnerships will form the foundation of a dynamic law school dedicated to learning. | | | | |
>
> | Finally, the law school community must reward successful teachers. Professors who mentor students into careers that suit their interests and desires should be celebrated. | | | Conclusion | |
<
< | By aligning instruction to the basic principles of leadership, classes will be more focused, student mastery will increase, and, therefore, Columbia will graduate more proficient lawyers. Since many (if not the vast majority) of the faculty already have the requisite desire to see students succeed, equipping them with the tools necessary to ensure success will create a 1L curriculum focused on student learning. | >
> | By aligning instruction to the basic principles of leadership, classes will be more focused, learning will increase, and, therefore, Columbia will graduate more proficient lawyers. Since the vast majority of the faculty members possess the requisite desire to see students succeed, equipping them with the tools necessary to ensure success will greatly improve 1L learning. | | |
- I think a faculty discussion of this essay, if it were made still more diplomatic at one or two spots for sensitive dispositions, could be arranged, and would be fascinating. I think you have done a very fine job in presenting a simple and compelling case. It would prove a useful jumping off point, if people would let themselves listen.
| |
>
> |
-
- I am hoping to get this to a place where that is possible. Feedback much appreciated. -- AdamCarlis
| | | | | | Kate, in the classroom, teaching the theory of law is doable; teaching the practice of law is an impossible task. This probably seems obvious, but my instinctual suggestion is that the best you can do for now is to sign up for as many 2L clinical credits as you can -- at least that will get you partly out of the classroom and into real cases. I do think the school sees a problem here and is trying to address it; it's a shame that the whole 3L year couldn't be built around clinical-type experiences, though.
-- BarbPitman - 09 Apr 2008 | |
>
> |
Barb, why don't clinic's take place "in the classroom"?
-- AdamCarlis - 22 Apr 2008 | | | |
|
|
AdamCarlis-SecondPaper 15 - 09 Apr 2008 - Main.BarbPitman
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | Maybe we should cut the faculty and give some of their salary back as tuition grants since we're paying to teach ourselves?
-- KateVershov - 08 Apr 2008 | |
>
> |
Kate, in the classroom, teaching the theory of law is doable; teaching the practice of law is an impossible task. This probably seems obvious, but my instinctual suggestion is that the best you can do for now is to sign up for as many 2L clinical credits as you can -- at least that will get you partly out of the classroom and into real cases. I do think the school sees a problem here and is trying to address it; it's a shame that the whole 3L year couldn't be built around clinical-type experiences, though.
-- BarbPitman - 09 Apr 2008 | | | |
|
|