Building on Best Practices and the Clinical Theory Workshop

Thought-provoking discussion at the NYLS Clinical Theory Workshop on Friday.

Definitions. Carrie Kaas reported on the “definitions” project of an Alliance for Experiential Education Committee chaired by Cindy Adcock of Charlotte. That committee is attempting to generate a common vocabulary around experiential learning — a set of common definitions for the overlapping and inconsistently used terms now in use. The Building on Best Practices project will need to decide whether to adopt that vocabulary, or not.

One of the most interesting, and challenging, tasks is to decide what differentiates an in-house clinic from an externship. Is it geography? Who pays the supervisor? A distinction rooted in pedagogy? Degree of independent role assumption? Or perhaps the distinction is no longer useful & and is ready to be junked?

I lean towards pedagogy & intensity of supervision, and degree of independent role assumption. Except when I lean towards junking the terminology and recognizing that we’re dealing with a continuum on multiple dimensions, as argued in Revision Quest: A Law School Guide to Designing Experiential Courses Involving Real Lawyering.

Sequencing. Cynthia Batt from Stetson presented her draft article on curriculum sequencing that is one of several independent articles spawned by the Building on Best Practices book project. Arguing for what I have termed the “layer cake” curriculum model, she conceded that the model is not necessarily the “only” or “best” model. But, she suggested, at schools where significant numbers of faculty are resistant to integrating experiential education throughout the curriculum, whether due to insecurity about lack of practice experience, fear of change, or other reasons, it is one that might have the best chance of implementation. Fair enough. A reminder to me that I’m at a school with relatively little resistance to experiential education.

Under the Radar Creativity. Cynthia made another comment that I’ve been pondering: “I am so impressed with my colleagues’ creativity, the kinds of work they are having students do that no one else knew about. Why are people so reluctant to talk about experiential education embedded in ‘traditional’ doctrinal education?”

That creativity certainly permeates my own law school. Based on a survey last spring, my colleagues are integrating experiential exercises into over 50 doctrinal courses. And they’ve created a long list of very creative simulation oriented courses, ranging from Venture Capital Deals to Supreme Court Decision Making to International Contracting.

So much of this creativity operates pretty “under the radar screen”. But I’m not sure it’s reluctance exactly. Lack of time? Lack of an appropriate forum? Understated, we-don’t-blow-our-own-horn Seattle manners?

I don’t know. But if our two schools at opposite corners of the country are representative, perhaps legal education has changed more than we know. Are we approaching a tipping point?

Advertisements

Building on Best Practices in Legal Education

On a more cheery note:

Regular reader of this blog know that a follow-up volume to Best Practices in Legal Education is underway.  That volume, due out in 2015, is titled Building on Best Practices.  It’s a big, collaborative effort with 4 co-editors (I’m one, along with Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, Lisa Bliss, and Carrie Kaas) and over 30 authors, supported by almost as many readers of sections or chapters.

We held informal workshop sessions on five excellent section drafts during the AALS conference — 1 via Skype due to the weather.   Discussion was lively, intense, and productive as participants struggled with the challenge of distinguishing among good, better and best practices.  And being reminded that sometimes just having a practice is a best practice!

A huge shout out to the authors:

Benjamin Madison and Natt Gant (Fostering professional identity)

Paula Shaefer (Incorporating professionalism in doctrinal courses )

Eliza Vorenberg, Eden Harrington,  Betsy Kane, Trish Keady, Sue Shechter, David Udall, and Gloria Valencia-Weber (The role of pro bono )

Barbara Glesner-Fines (Assessment of students)

Marty Katz and Ken Margolis (Administrative Issues & Incentives)

%d bloggers like this: