« January 20, 2008 - January 26, 2008 | Main | February 3, 2008 - February 9, 2008 »

January 29, 2008

Law Prof as Toolmaker

On Law Librarian Blog today, there is an interview I conducted with Thomas A. Smith (San Diego) about the development of his new legal research search engine, PreCYdent. -- Joe Hodnicki

January 29, 2008 in Technology -- for advancing scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 28, 2008

Interdisciplinary debates and the law school mission in "The Age of Ambition"

Nicholas Kristof had this interesting op-ed, titled "The Age of Ambition," in Sunday's New York Times. Here are excerpts:

With the American presidential campaign in full swing, the obvious way to change the world might seem to be through politics.  But growing numbers of young people are leaping into the fray and doing the job themselves.  These are the social entrepreneurs, the 21st-century answer to the student protesters of the 1960s, and they are some of the most interesting people here at the World Economic Forum (not only because they’re half the age of everyone else)....

Today the most remarkable young people are the social entrepreneurs, those who see a problem in society and roll up their sleeves to address it in new ways.  Bill Drayton, the chief executive of an organization called Ashoka that supports social entrepreneurs, likes to say that such people neither hand out fish nor teach people to fish; their aim is to revolutionize the fishing industry. If that sounds insanely ambitious, it is.  John Elkington and Pamela Hartigan title their new book on social entrepreneurs “The Power of Unreasonable People.” 

Universities are now offering classes in social entrepreneurship, and there are a growing number of role models. Wendy Kopp turned her thesis at Princeton into Teach for America and has had far more impact on schools than the average secretary of education....

So as we follow the presidential campaign, let’s not forget that the winner isn’t the only one who will shape the world.  Only one person can become president of the United States, but there’s no limit to the number of social entrepreneurs who can make this planet a better place.

Interestingly, none of the social entrepreneurs mentioned by Kristof appear to have any law school training.  And yet, as highlighted in this guest-post over at Glom, my colleague Garry Jenkins (who helped to create Ohio State's new Program on Law and Leadership) has a vision that involves law schools teaching skills that seem essential for "social entrepreneurs."  Here is an excerpt from Garry's account of why he developed a "Lawyers as Leaders" course:

I think leadership education needs to be a critical piece of legal education.  I would argue that leadership development is central to our mission.  If lawyers are to play key roles in the profession, in their communities, in government, in their organizations, they need to combine their legal skills with leadership skills.  When I talk to law students about their aspirations I become even more convinced. Indeed, this should not be surprising because law schools are a rich source of intelligent and ambitious people.  Whether students are interested in public or private law issues or pursuing non-traditional career options, leadership issues abound. Even in traditional law firm practices, professionals taking on senior leaderships responsibilities (e.g., Managing Partner, Practice Chair, etc.) or important committee posts (e.g., executive, management, promotion, compensation, or strategy) must learn how to effectively exercise leadership in environments where many of the formal sources of power and authority are limited.

Among other virtues, the Kistof op-ed and Garry's post give me insights on the raging debate over interdisciplinary scholarship and teaching in law school (TaxProf highlight the debate here and here).  In my view, interdisciplinary work in law schools is essential if a law school's mission is to produce social entrepreneurs and/or leader-lawyers.  However, if a law school's mission is to produce effective practicing lawyers, interdisciplinary work can often be a distraction (or at least an opportunity cost). 

And this takes us back Brian Tamanaha's original post on Balkinization, Why the Interdisciplinary Movement in Legal Academia Might be a Bad Idea (For Most Law Schools).  Because of their elite student populations, elite law schools can and likely should define their mission in terms of producing social entrepreneurs and/or leader-lawyers.  Other law schools, however, may justifiably need to define their mission simply in terms of producing effective practicing lawyers.

January 28, 2008 in The mission of law schools | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack

January 27, 2008

The Amicus Class

Reading what Professors Doug Berman (here) and Mark Osler (here) wrote on doing amici briefs reminded me of how I solved one of the "cons" to this experience mentioned by Doug. 

Writing amici briefs are truly a rewarding personal experience.  They allow you to remain connected with the practice and also to have a voice in pending litigation. But Doug was concerned about the time drain this experience would have, and he mentions one group that might be slighted -- students.

While teaching at Georgia State University College of Law, I solved this last problem by offering a course that focused on writing amici briefs.  The class had a limited number of students - 12, and was a hands-on experience class running similar to an in-house clinic.

There were three parts to the class. In the introductory part of the class we studied the role of amici briefs and the rules related to filing these briefs. The second part of the course required each student to write a mock amici brief on a case that they believed the Supreme Court might take that term.  It was necessary for them to examine the docket, study the issues in forthcoming decisions, and find one case likely to be selected.  The case needed to interest them and also provide an issue that would not be the central issue presented by the parties, or allowed them to present the issue in a new direction.  Clearly this was not an easy task. 

The final part of the course was its highlight. The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL)  allowed me to pick from one of their cases needing amici briefs.  Our class selected our Supreme Court case, and also selected an 11th Circuit case and we wrote the amici briefs - dividing the class into two groups to facilitate this process. 

This was an incredibly rewarding class for me, and the students raved about it. It allowed for collaborative work, allowed for teaching "skills and values,"  and focused on not only substance and procedure in criminal law, but also on the practice.  My hope was that one day this course could also be offered by someone with prosecution ties so that students desiring this upper level capstone experience could select from different perspectives.  And it is now my hope that one day I will repeat this experience in my new wonderful home at Stetson University College of Law.

It is wonderful to see the Ohio State Criminal Law Journal providing an outlet for the amici voice in the new Amici: Views From the Field.  And when you see the list of participants, it is most impressive (e.g. Hon. Nancy Gertner). I take my Stetson hat off to Professor Doug Berman on this one.

ellen s. podgor

January 27, 2008 in Teaching -- new courses | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack