On the Value of Gap Years and Non-Legal Experience to Legal Employers (and Law Schools)

Reviewing the results of the Foundations for Practice survey conducted by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS), I cannot help but note how the 24,000 responding attorneys ranked the helpfulness of various criteria for hiring beginning lawyers. (See here.) Just under 80 percent (78.3%, to be exact) identified “life experience between college and law school” as either a very helpful or somewhat helpful hiring criterion. Moreover, while “legal employment” (88.4% ranking as very or somewhat helpful) and “legal externship” (81.5%) unsurprisingly sat near the top of the list, “other experiential education” — meaning non-legal — was very close behind at 79.4%.

The responding attorneys, from a wide variety of practice areas and from throughout the country, ranked these two non-legal experience criteria — “life experience between college and law school” and “other experiential education” — as slightly more helpful than certain types of legal experience, including federal court clerkships, state court clerkships, and participation in law school clinics. The starker divide, however, came when considering traditional hiring criteria related to law school performance. While well over three quarters of respondents classified both personal and professional experience of a non-legal nature as helpful hiring criteria, only 62.5% said the same about law school class rank. Similarly, only 61.1% said so about law school attended, and merely 51.2% said so about law review experience.

One narrative coming out of the survey could indeed be that practical experience matters more than academic experience, and that seems to be what IAALS is highlighting. But, consistent with the results discussed above, I would suggest another as well: Non-legal experience — both personal and professional — matters almost as much, if not just as much, as legal experience.

The survey was just the first phrase of IAALS’s broader project, entitled Foundations for Practice, and the second phrase, which is being implemented now, directly implicates law schools. IAALS is working with four law schools to “translate the survey results into actionable learning outcomes and hiring rubrics.”

The current phrase focusing on law school outcomes turns my mind to the “incoming” side of law school admissions. The results of the survey suggest to me that law schools should more explicitly prioritize admission of students with meaningful life experience or non-legal professional experience. In addition, if it is not already, LSAC ought to be gathering and reporting to law schools pertinent data as to what percentage of law school applicants are undergraduate students who would be going directly to law school. And, as to those who are not, what are the percentages one year out from the undergraduate degree, two years, three or more, etc.? Just as law schools view national statistics on other important admissions criteria (GPA, LSAT, ethnic diversity, to mention a few) as important benchmarks, they ought to be in a position to do the same for number of years since undergraduate degree.

Having a significant percentage of students with meaningful life experience outside of the law is indisputably of great benefit to the law school learning environment. I see it every year in my classroom. More to the point of the IAALS survey results, by bringing in a significant number of students with such experience, law schools will be contributing to better outcomes — learning outcomes and employment outcomes. In a typical incoming J.D. class at my home school, the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, 20% to 30% of the students are three or more years removed from their undergraduate degree. We do not have a part-time or night program, and certainly those schools that do will have higher percentages of that demographic.

At least one-third and in some years close to one-half of the students in our typical incoming class are coming straight out of their undergraduate studies without even one gap year. This demographic exists at nearly every law school in the country (in varying percentages). Given what we know about the next generation of law students, and given the importance of life experience and non-legal experience as hiring criteria to today’s legal employers, these students would seem to face a more challenging path. What do law schools need to do, if anything? Offer or enhance existing professional development programming or curricula? Offer or enhance existing experiential opportunities that are not exclusively legal in nature and that expose students to non-lawyers and other disciplines and experiences? (Just two examples: teaching or working with high school students, or working with entrepreneurs at a tech startup. Law schools affiliated with a university can offer assorted interdisciplinary educational opportunities as well.)  I will be interested to see if the second phrase of the IAALS project emphasizes ideas like these or others that respond to the demonstrated need for lawyers with life experience and non-legal professional experience.


More Thoughts on the Post-Millenial Generation of Students Arriving in Law School

In two thoughtful posts from last month, here and here, Shailini Jandial George and then Andi Curcio and Sara Berman offered specific and practical suggestions of ways that we as legal educators can reach the post-millenial generation of students through our teaching. These posts bring to mind Professor Jean M. Twenge’s recently published book iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood.  Twenge is probably the pre-eminent generational researcher in this country, and her empirical findings reported in the book have profound implications for legal education. What’s more, those implications are here now. Twenge defines the post-millenial “iGen” (sometimes referred to as Generation Z) as those born between 1995 and 2012, meaning the oldest among them are approaching their mid 20s—the average student age at most American law schools. In Twenge’s words, “[t]hey grew up with cell phones, had an Instagram page before they started high school, and do not remember a time before the internet. They are different from any generation that came before them.”

One concerning and challenging implication for legal education relates to the role law schools should play in inculcating basic norms of professional behavior, especially those of importance to interpersonal interaction. Given that they have spent an enormous percentage of time during their formative years on social media and elsewhere in the virtual world, most of today’s law students (those in their early to mid 20s, at least) have far less interpersonal experience than previous generations had at the same age. Speaking more broadly, as Twenge’s research reveals, they have largely avoided or deferred grown-up responsibilities that previous generations were tackling often in their teens. Much of Twenge’s research focused on high school and college students, considering such responsibilities as learning to drive, moving out of the house, and gaining financial independence. Still, as we teach and mentor law students in their early to mid 20s, we must consider what other grown up responsibilities and behaviors that we expect of legal professionals can no longer be taken for granted.

In a recent survey conducted by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS), a wide array of legal employers ranked the legal skills and professional competencies and characteristics that they believe new lawyers most need to succeed. (The study’s results are reported here. There is also a detailed accounting of the results and an explanation of the study’s role within IAALS’s broader project in the summer 2018 edition of The Bar Examiner, pp. 17-26.) The results revealed that legal employers value foundational characteristics and competencies much more than they do foundational legal skills. Among the top 20: Arrive on time for meetings, appointments, and hearings; Treat others with courtesy and respect; Listen attentively and respectfully; Promptly respond to inquiries and requests; and Exhibit tact and diplomacy. The only specific legal skill that reached the top 20 was legal research.

If we in legal education have been presuming that our arriving 1Ls possess these basic types of competencies, or at least understand their importance, I am not at all sure that we can do so any longer. The visceral reaction for so many of us, no doubt, is that it is not the job of a law school to teach students these and other very basic norms of interpersonal relations for professionals. Imagine some variation of “they should have learned that in college or high school or from their parents” or “they’ll learn the hard way in their first summer legal job.” Given legal education’s obligation to the profession that it serves, we ought to move past those mindsets. I recognize that many in legal education have done so, and I recognize that many law schools have developed programming or courses on different aspects of developing a professional identity. But professional identity, at least as it was discussed in the Carnegie Foundation’s Educating Lawyers, relates more to appreciating one’s role as a legal professional in society more broadly. It takes on a moral component. That remains important. What I raise here, however, is more behavioral and foundational: Meet deadlines, arrive on time, respond to inquiries promptly, be tactful and diplomatic with others, etc., etc.

In my 1L Legal Analysis & Writing course, I seek to instill professional behavioral norms through various course policies, all explicitly stated in my syllabus, concerning compliance with deadlines, punctual attendance at class and scheduled meetings, civil and respectful interaction with classmates and me, timely and good faith completion of ungraded exercises, etc.  A percentage of each student’s grade depends on how well he or she meets these professional standards. Two of my students missed their first deadline for an ungraded exercise last week; neither had any kind of explanation. Consistent with the underlying professionalism theme of my course, I informed these students that such behavior, if repeated, would fail to meet my professional standards, just as it would fail to meet the professional standards of any legal employer.

It will be interesting to see if and how Twenge’s findings manifest themselves in the current and future 1L classes. I strongly recommend the book; it provides an excellent foundation for putting a variety of possible student behaviors into context.

Concrete Suggestions for Bar Exam Reform

Many of us have spent decades critiquing the bar exam, and particularly the MBE’s multiple choice question content and format. In How to Build a Better Bar Exam, a short essay written with Professors Carol Chomsky and Eileen Kaufman, we discuss two law licensing exams that provide concrete examples of how to address some of those critiques.


“As a licensing exam, the purpose of the bar exam is consumer protection–-ensuring that new lawyers have the minimum competencies required to practice law effectively. As critics point out, however, the exam, and particularly the multiple-choice question portion of the exam, has significant flaws because it assesses legal knowledge and analysis in an artificial and unrealistic context, and the closed-book format rewards the ability to memorize thousands of legal rules, a skill unrelated to law practice.

This essay discusses how to improve the exam by changing its multiple-choice content and format. We use two law licensing exams to illustrate how bar examiners could utilize an open-book format and develop multiple-choice questions that assess a candidate’s ability to engage in legal reasoning and analysis without demanding unproductive memorization of so many detailed rules of law. The first example, the case file approach, is drawn from a 1983 California “Performance Test” in which test-takers received a case file and a series of multiple-choice questions testing the candidates’ ability to read, understand, and use cases to support their legal positions. The second example discusses the current licensing exam administered by The Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC), an open-book multiple-choice exam that tests the use of doctrinal knowledge in the context of law practice.

These two licensing exams demonstrate how we could re-structure the bar exam’s multiple-choice questions to measure legal analysis and reasoning skills as lawyers use those skills to represent clients. They also demonstrate that we can do a better job of testing some aspects of minimum competence, while still using a multiple-choice exam format.”

Andi Curcio

New Research on Law-Student Resiliency

Student resiliency and well-being are on-going concerns to the legal education community. Counselling, academic support, and activities like yoga have been introduced in law schools to address these concerns. Although these strategies are undoubtedly beneficial, a recent research paper suggests that legal educators may have an additional, all-encompassing solution under their noses – the cultural mindset we create in our classrooms.

In the paper The Jury Is In: Law Schools Foster Students’ Fixed Mindsets, Susan Shapcott, Sarah Davis, and Lane Hanson suggest that the law school experience promotes fixed mindsets in law students. Many educators are familiar with Carol Dweck’s work and the concept of mindsets; when students perceive intelligence as an innate trait that one either has or doesn’t have, this is a referred to as a fixed mindset. At the other end of the spectrum, perceiving intelligence as something that develops with effort, strategy and time is referred to as a growth mindset.

The authors reported that third year law students’ mindsets were significantly more fixed than first year students’ mindsets. How does this relate to resiliency and well-being? Quite simply, mindsets are predictive of students’ goals and resiliency to challenges (an inherent part of law school). As students’ mindsets become more fixed, they are more likely to adopt goals intended to demonstrate how smart they are. Consequently, they are less likely to ask for help when they most need it, they will perceive professors’ feedback as judgement, and they may interpret mistakes as evidence that they just don’t have what it takes to succeed. Not only are these behaviors motivationally problematic, they are problematic for mental well-being.

Across a range of fields, growth mindsets are associated with adaptive learning strategies and mentally healthy behaviors that promote well-being and resiliency. So arguably, this is the culture that we should be focused on developing in law schools. However, as Shapcott, et al., report, the opposite may be happening. The longer students are exposed to law-school culture, the more fixed their mindsets become. Therefore, it is time to recognize that there is something adrift in our culture. Furthermore, we cannot simply focus on students’ mindsets without reflecting on the role we as educators play in influencing them.

Students’ well-being won’t change much until law schools work to change the culture from within. Law school classrooms that help students develop growth, not fixed mindsets will do more for students’ resiliency and long-term growth. This starts with faculty members reframing how intelligence and lawyering skills are described (they are learned skills, not innate gifts). When faculty share their own vulnerabilities and struggles to grasp concepts, they create a classroom culture where students are less afraid to ask for help. And when professors give accurate feedback intended to teach students how and what is required for them to improve, rather than simply judging their intelligence, they will help create a growth-mindset culture that reduces students’ stress and increases their strategies for manage their learning experience.

Reaching Today’s Law Students: Tips for Starting the New School Year

By Sara Berman and Andrea[Andi] Curcio

Today’s students are more diverse, raised on the Internet and social media, used to skimming rather than reading closely, communicate via texts, tweets and gifs, and often learn from youtube videos. Many students grew up with helicopter parents who continue to make decisions for and intervene on behalf of their adult children. So, how do we reach these students and help them become professional, responsible, ethical, good lawyers?

Below, we provide three teaching tips for the new academic year. These are not global solutions. Instead, they are simple, easily implementable suggestions that may help address certain aspects of the significant, complex, and nuanced challenges the academy faces in effectively educating today’s students.

I. Belonging/community creates success

Claude Steele and Josh Aronson educated us about stereotype threat and its negative affects on student performance. As one group of researchers notes, “one consequence of negative stereotypes is to cause people to wonder if they will be fully included and valued in an academic environment.”

The literature suggests that feeling one does not belong triggers a series of stress reactions that may affect motivation and academic success, as well as physical health and psychological well being.

While schools need to develop structures that create a sense of community and belonging for all students, faculty can take some simple steps to create a sense of belonging in our classrooms. As researchers note, one of the first steps is to correctly pronounce all students’ names.

The Importance of Learning to Pronounce Names

Correctly pronouncing a person’s name indicates a respect for that person and provides a clear signal that the person “belongs” in your classroom. Consistently mispronouncing names sends the opposite message.

Some faculty members may avoid calling on students with names they find difficult to pronounce because they don’t want to embarrass themselves or the student. While students may fear being called on, they also expect it. Not calling on students sends a message that those students do not belong in your classroom or in law school.

Finally, students get to know one another when they hear each other called on by name. When you correctly pronounce a student’s name, his or her colleagues will do the same. This facilitates out-of-class socialization, including forming study groups.

Tip: Pass out index cards and ask each student to phonetically spell his or her name.

On the first day of class, distribute index cards and ask each student to phonetically spell his or her name. Use the cards to practice pronouncing students’ names in your office, and use them when calling on students until you feel comfortable pronouncing their names. Invite students to let you know if you mispronounce their names and make notes on the card to help you get it right next time.

Making an effort to correctly pronounce all students’ names sends a message to your students that you care about them, that you are willing to learn that which is initially unfamiliar to you, and that all students in your class belong there.

II. Empower students to find their own answers

Many students have grown up with “helicopter parents” – parents described by one set of researchers as being “high on warmth/support, high on control, and low on granting autonomy”. As Professor Palmer notes, this type of parenting potentially produces law students with limited critical thinking and problem solving skills. It also means that some students enter law school, expecting the same level of assistance from faculty as they got from their parents.

Many of today’s students need training on how to become expert, self-regulated learners who engage in independent problem solving. Numerous articles, including those by Professor Palmer and Professor Ritter suggest ways to help law students develop into professionals able to think critically and engage in independent problem solving. Again, here we focus on just one easily implementable tip.

Tip: When a student asks or emails you a question, try not to be a “helicopter professor.

Respond Promptly but Not Immediately

Instead of immediately answering, take a few hours to see if the student resolves the question on his or her own. (How many times have you received a second email from a student two minutes after a first saying that the student found the answer so “never mind.”)

Encourage The Student To Find The Answer

If a student does not resolve the issue initially on his or her own, engage the student in the process of finding the answer him or herself. You might use a technique similar to the Socractic method we use to help students discover and understand doctrinal complexities, asking the student to consider where he or she might find the answer.

Manage expectations by letting the class know that, as part of a deliberate plan to help them develop into problem solving lawyers, you will not directly answer questions that you have already provided answers to in class resources. (E.g. you will not tell them something that is in the syllabus.) Also let them know that they learn best if they figure out the answer to complex questions on their own and that you will help them by asking questions that challenge them to do that.

Recognize that Students May Need Guidance

When questions require searching beyond sources you have already provided (the syllabus and assigned texts and postings), recognize that students may not have a clue how to go about what seems like common sense research to us. Thus, consider recommending a specific treatise or encouraging the student to consult the research librarians. Then, invite the student to check back after their search if they still have questions or need further clarity.

Don’t Give In To Temptation

It may be hard to resist answering a question – especially when that answer is at our fingertips. It is almost always quicker to answer the question than work with the student as he or she tries to find the answer. Also, some faculty want to avoid seeming “mean”. Whatever the reason, try to avoid the temptation to automatically answer student questions. In the long run, answering questions rather than empowering students to find their own answers hurts more than it helps.

III. Push students to develop a command of legal terminology

Immersion in the language of law school has always been confusing, even for top students 40 years ago. Scott Turow, writing in his 1977 novel, One L, about his first year at Harvard law school describes learning what he calls “Legal” as “a second language.” Turow notes, “Legal bore some relation to English,” but it twists and turns in ways that make it resemble a “very peculiar” “dialect,” one in which even familiar words may have different meanings.

Today’s students are likely to find terminology even more challenging than students in prior generations as many modern students enter law school without a strong civics foundations. As Professor Flanagan notes, “College graduates are unprepared to master “thinking like a lawyer” because they lack the fundamental thinking, reading, and writing skills that form the foundation for learning in law school.” Though dictionaries are with them at all times (on omnipresent phones), they seem

to consult them less frequently than those of us who lugged around hardback copies of Black’s Law Dictionary.

Tip: Require students to create and record short [1 to 2 minute] videos in which they explain and contextualize important legal terms in plain English

Using Familiar Tools to Connect Fluency in Legal Terminology to Law Practice

Students all have cellphones and most record videos of themselves and their friends. This exercise uses those tools to help students create fluency and deeper understanding of legal terminology.

This active learning, plain English translation exercise will help the terminology stick because it requires first understanding the terms and then being able to explain them in context. It also contributes to professional identity and community building as students see and hear themselves, and each other, using words in an actual (simulated) lawyering context.

Encourage students to be creative, working alone or in pairs, and write and act out a “mini script” that simulates a conversation explaining and using the term in context with a lay person they might encounter in practice such as a potential future client, an IT person at their future law firm, a witness, juror, or non lawyer expert. Creating “real life” scenarios helps students understand that this exercise is not “busy work” but instead is a building block in learning critical lawyering skills.

For those students who need additional reasons to master “legalese” generally as well as the specific terminology associated with your course, remind them that mastery not only empowers them to get more out of, and connect on a deeper level with, their studies, it also will likely help them get a better grade on your final and help prepare them to pass the bar exam.

Use the Videos as A Class Learning Experience

You may require everyone to turn in one video, or decide to give extra or participation credit for completing a set of 5-10 such videos. The videos can help both the students making them and their colleagues.

Alert students to the fact that you will post their videos on a private YouTube channel, or on TWEN, BlackBoard or whatever online system you use for other class materials. Your IT person can easily show you how to do this.

While you could provide feedback on each video, or a sample of videos, another option is to post the videos to a class video library with a discussion board. This shows students their work is being seen. It also allows them to constructively comment on each other’s videos, and it creates an “online class dictionary.”

You may want to ask students’ permission to use their videos in future classes so that you can show the best clips to future students. (Most will readily agree and will probably take the exercise even more seriously knowing you plan to use them in the future, and they will likely appreciate that you are taking their work seriously too.)

IV. Share Your Own Tips

Each of the tips discussed above are relatively easy to implement and have a potential high payoff in student engagement and learning, community building, and the creation of professional identity. We know you have other tips and hope you will share those with all of us.

Move Over Millennials, Gen Z is Coming!

I have written a lot about teaching millennials in my scholarship and prior posts. Now I’m realizing it is time to start thinking about the next generation that will hit law school: Generation Z (“Gen Z”). Gen Z was born between 1998 and 2016, so its oldest members are close to 21 years old right now. So, they will be in law school soon.

What can we expect from them? Gen Z has only known a world of terrorism, recession, racial unrest, corporate scandals, under-employment and uncertainty. They’ve also only known a world of portable devices, multi-tasking, social media, and complex social issues. Similar to millennials, technology has shaped their daily lives and their world view. They do not know of a time before the internet, they like to stream content, often in small bits, like through YouTube, and consume most technology on their phones and computers. While some of us, for example, may seek “how to” information in a brochure or pamphlet, or even an online manual, Gen Z will often look for this same kind of information on YouTube. They like to learn by seeing, not just reading or listening. Gen Z uses social media differently than millennials, as they are more aware of the public nature of their posts. Gen Z also embraces diversity. This may be because they are the most racially diverse generation in America. Members of Gen Z are also more likely to say they have friends of a different sexual orientation. Although they are too young to be thinking of marriage themselves, their preference for inclusion means they strongly support marriage equality.  They enjoy group work and collaboration, so long as they see the greater goal to be achieved by the work.

What does all this mean for teaching?  The experience of learning is important to a Gen Z student. They do not want to sit through a long lecture, when they can watch  the same content through multiple engaging podcasts, or videos. So, for educators, the question is, how can we engage this learner without compromising the educational process?

• Allow technology use to take advantage of their drive for self-learning. Instead of taking devices away in the classroom, incorporate them into activities that promote and teach searching for and recognizing credible information.
• Build a connection with students beyond the walls of the classroom. A Gen Z learner is constantly connected to their social network. Consider using social apps for questions. For some learners, this may be the most comfortable way for them to ask questions.
• Lastly, try breaking content down into sizeable bites. Capture their attention with visuals. Gen Z prefers microlearning, though you’ll need to remind them of the bigger context. Keeping it simple, but sparking their curiosity can hook them into paying attention.


An Easy Way for Your Students to Learn More about Actual Legal Practice

The new academic year will begin soon (yikes!) and you may be finishing your syllabi for the fall semester.

If you want to help your students get a better understanding of the real world of practice in a wide range of courses, you can include a Stone Soup Project assignment in your courses by having students conduct interviews and/or observe court proceedings.

In some courses, you might assign students to interview lawyers or professionals that lawyers often work with.  In many courses, you might assign students to interview friends or relatives to get clients’ perspectives, which is too often missing in legal education.  Stone Soup has been used successfully in clinical and externship courses as students conduct focused interviews of supervisors or clients.

Last year, the project has engaged about 1000 students in 40 classes covering 12 subjects, taught by 32 faculty from 25 schools in 3 countries.  This is an understatement because some colleagues have essentially used Stone Soup assignments for years, well before the Stone Soup Project started, and they aren’t included in these figures.  Although faculty used Stone Soup mostly in traditional ADR courses, they also used it in other courses including in access to justice, evidence, externship, and trusts and estates courses.

This post provides links to resources that make it easy for you to use a Stone Soup assignment.

This post describes how faculty could use Stone Soup assignments in 1L courses and includes model assignments tailored to contracts, property, torts, civil procedure, and criminal law courses.  In contracts, property, and torts classes, students may be able to interview friends or relatives about their experiences.  In civ pro, students (perhaps in groups) can interview lawyers about strategy in handling pleading, discovery, motions, or other civ pro issues.  In criminal law, students can observe court proceedings in criminal law matters.  This post suggests that faculty require students to do interviews in these courses (or court observations in criminal law courses) but not require students to write papers or be graded on these assignments.  It explains why – perhaps counterintuitively – students could get a lot of benefit from doing these assignments very early in a course, before they learn the legal rules.

This post suggests ideas for faculty to use Stone Soup assignments in 2L and 3L courses, with specific suggestions for administrative law, bankruptcy, business organizations, commercial transactions, consumer protection, employment discrimination, evidence, family law, insurance, interviewing and counseling, labor law, landlord-tenant law, pretrial litigation, professional responsibility, real estate, tax, and trusts and estates courses.  You could use Stone Soup in other upper level courses as well.  As with 1L courses, you may want students to conduct interviews or observations early in the course and without requiring students to write papers.

This post collects faculty assessments of their Stone Soup experiences, including the assignments that faculty used and discussion of what worked well and what they might do differently in the future.

Here’s a table identifying characteristics of Stone Soup courses and providing links to faculty assessments of the courses.  For each course, the table shows the class size; whether the assignment was required, an option, or extra credit;  paper length (if any); due date; percentage of the grade allocated to the assignment (if any); and whether the assignment was discussed in class.

This post provides specific suggestions based on faculty assessments.  Here’s some key advice based on faculty’s experiences.

This post provides a complete set of documents to help you plan a Stone Soup assignment.  It includes: (1) guidance in developing these assignments, (2) a general model for an interview assignment, (3) guidance for students in conducting and summarizing interviews, (4) a model invitation for an interview, (5) a summary of professional ethics rules about confidentiality (indicating that professionals can discuss case information if they don’t include information that could reasonably identify the parties), (6) model paper format, (7) two sample grading rubrics, and (8) a consent form for students who want to share their papers publicly.

This post includes exemplary papers from negotiation (5), trusts and estates (3), and evidence (3) courses.  These papers can give you ideas about what you might want students to do in papers for your courses and you could suggest that students might use certain papers as models for the kind of analysis you want them to do.

If you would like to use a Stone Soup assignment in one or more of your courses next year,  please email me to let me know which course(s) and semester(s) so that we can include you in an updated roster of Stone Soup faculty.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss how you might use Stone Soup in your courses, feel free to email me.

I hope you enjoy the rest of the summer.


%d bloggers like this: