• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
With the recent publication of the Best Practices in Legal Education,(1) and the Carnegie Report on the Advancement of Teaching,(2) law professors today have an opportunity to adopt pedagogies that have been successfully used in other professional disciplines that, like law, integrate skills and theory. In this article, we focus specifically on the “see one, do one, teach one” approach used in medical education because medical students and law students develop early professional reasoning skills in parallel ways.(3)

This article dissects medical education’s signature pedagogy by focusing on the use of simulation and samples, active learning exercises, and peer teaching opportunities as a corollary to using visualization, application, and demonstration in the medical context. The article guides legal educators through the process of implementing the methodology. This article concludes that utilizing the “see one, do one, teach one” methodology facilitates student engagement with course material on a deeper analytical level, by providing context for the students, and allowing students to internalize and transfer that knowledge.(4) Accordingly, borrowing the signature “see one, do one, teach one” pedagogy from medical education will ultimately help students better bridge the gap between law school and the practice of law.

(1) ROY STUCKEY AND OTHERS, BEST PRACTICES FOR LEGAL EDUCATION (2007).
(2) WILLIAM M. SULLIVAN, ANNE COLBY, JUDITH WELCH WEGNER, LLOYD BOND & LEE S. SHULMAN, EDUCATING LAWYERS: PREPARATION FOR THE PROFESSION OF LAW (2007).
(3) See Stefan H. Krieger, The Development of Legal Reasoning Skills in Law Students: An Empirical Study, 56 J. LEGAL EDUC. 332, 351-53 (2006).
(4) Carol McCrehan Parker, Writing Through the Curriculum: Why Law Schools Need It and How to Achieve It, 76 NEB. L. REV. 561, 583-84 (1997).

Abstract:
The past two years have been a period of landmark transformation in legal education. With the issuance of the Carnegie and Best Practices in Legal Education reports, law schools and law professors have re-begun the essential process of analyzing and transforming legal pedagogy. This widespread re-examination of the law school curriculum has yielded two important changes in legal education: first, law schools - including those in the top tier - have begun radically to amend their curricular goals and structures; and, second, legal scholars have begun to turn their attention to the theory and implementation of better legal education. As Carnegie and Best Practices note, this nascent metamorphosis in scholarly thought about legal education has the potential to transform both the law school and the law practice experience, as well-grounded pedagogy will remove the barriers to learning that some law students have historically experienced while better preparing them to practice law.

This article represents one of the first concrete responses to Carnegie and Best Practices. In proposing that law professors regularly use oral argument exercises to supplement traditional Socratic dialogue, it meets head on the concerns expressed by Best Practices and Carnegie that over-reliance on the Langdell method neither mimics law practice nor nurtures student learning. It also responds directly to the suggestion in both reports that simulation exercises may yield better legal analysis and knowledge. Finally, this article advances a novel theory directly related to the objectives and conclusions of the Reports; namely, that for experienced advocates and law students alike, practice oral argument may be a starting point, rather than a mere end point, for teaching, learning, and executing the fundamentals of legal analysis. In the style of the transcribed classroom conversations of the Carnegie Report, it discusses and demonstrates by example a simulation exercise designed for professors to use in introducing this teaching methodology. The exercise, based on seven fairy tales used as precedent cases, provides a familiar, non-threatening technique for students to learn about rule synthesis, weight of authority, analogy and distinction, and theme through oral argument.

Carnegie Reports, pedagogy, simulation exercises, oral advocacy

Abstract:
In law school, it is critical for students to look at issues from both sides, whether in responding to a law school exam hypothetical or in writing predictive memorandum assignments. In teaching students to engage in thoughtful legal analysis, therefore, professors should provide strategies to help students address counter-analysis as a critical component of the analysis. Developing a method for effectively teaching counter-analysis is important because good lawyering requires complex analysis that recognizes the subtleties of the situation being analyzed.

This article begins by defining counter-analysis generally and using social science and educational psychology theory to explain why the process is difficult. The article next examines relevant learning theory about cognition and illustrates how learning tools, such as graphic organizers, can assist with encoding analytical skills in the student’s long-term memory. The article then offers several examples for how law professors can apply cognitive learning theory to their classroom teaching of counter-analysis using graphic organizers. The article concludes by arguing that the teaching of counter-analysis, while difficult, is critical to fully develop a student’s analytic ability and should be taught using organized, systematic, active instructional techniques.

counter-analysis, counter-argument, graphic organizers, cognitive learning theory, teaching, legal analysis

Abstract:
This article discusses the use of statutes from two neighboring jurisdictions in teaching statutory interpretation. It explains how to teach students that the same statutory term may be interpreted differently, depending on the jurisdiction. It also explains how to use the exercise to teach tools of statutory construction.

legal writing, statutory interpretation, statutory construction

Abstract:
This humorous essay is a Top Ten List of ways to make get through a difficult period of teaching. Some of the strategies are personal, some professional.

legal writing, grading, teaching

Abstract:
This article advocates the use of a grading system that compares students’ work to that of practicing attorney. The scale incorporates professionalism, research writing, citation, mechanics, and legal analysis as scoring factors.

legal writing, grading, mastery, professionalism

Abstract:
This article advocates using real-life scenarios to help students understand that the law does not exist in a vacuum, but actually serves to help members of communities.

legal writing, professionalism, communities

Abstract:
This article discusses the use of Apollo 13 to teach students to use analytical tools to advocate for clients. It also compares the role of attorney to the role of the flight commander during the Apollo 13 mission.

advocacy, persuasive writing, attorney-client relationship