Table of Contents

Does Testing = Race Discrimination?: Ricci, the Bar Exam, the LSAT, and the Challenge to Learning

Dan Subotnik, Touro College - Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Legal Research Using New Technological Tools

Whitney A. Curtis, University of California Hastings College of the Law
Susan Silver, University of South Florida
Lauren Michelle Collins, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law

The Learning Journey: Please Take Me with You

Molly T. O'Brien, Australian National University - ANU College of Law

They Know Their Colors: Using Color-Coded Comments to Facilitate Revisions

Sarah J. Morath, University of Akron - School of Law

A Glossary for Experiential Education in Law Schools

Cynthia F. Adcock, Charlotte School of Law
Cynthia Batt, Stetson University College of Law
Susan L. Brooks, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law
Justine A. Dunlap, University of Massachusetts School of Law
Carolyn Wilkes Kaas, Quinnipiac University
Katherine R. Kruse, Hamline University - School of Law
Susan Maze-Rothstein, Northeastern University - School of Law
Ruth Anne Robbins, Rutgers School of Law - Camden

CREAC in the Real World

Diane Kraft, University of Kentucky College of Law


"Does Testing = Race Discrimination?: Ricci, the Bar Exam, the LSAT, and the Challenge to Learning" Free Download
8 U. Mass. L. Rev. 332 (2013)
Touro Law Center Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 14-43

DAN SUBOTNIK, Touro College - Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center

Aptitude and achievement tests have been under heavy attack in the courts and in academic literature for at least forty years. Griggs v. Duke Power (1971) and Ricci v. DeStefano (2009) are the most important judicial battle sites. In those cases, the Supreme Court decided the circumstances under which a test could be used by an employer to screen employees for promotion when the test had a negative racial impact on test takers.

The related battles over testing for entry into the legal academy and from the academy into the legal profession have been no less fierce. The assault on testing is founded on an amalgam of postmodernist, industrial organizational, and diversity theory. Leading the charge is the Society of American Law Teachers, which rightly claims that the LSAT, bar exam, and related law school accreditation standards have the effect of disproportionately keeping minorities out of the profession.

But if these tests do measure something useful and are abandoned, there will be consequences — and these are often ignored. They will affect not only parties vying for admissions and jobs but the nation as a whole.

"Legal Research Using New Technological Tools" Free Download
Research Methods in the Study of Legal Issues in Education 2nd ed. (Forthcoming)
UC Hastings Research Paper No. 123

WHITNEY A. CURTIS, University of California Hastings College of the Law
SUSAN SILVER, University of South Florida
LAUREN MICHELLE COLLINS, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law

The technology revolution has impacted every aspect of our daily lives. It is hard to imagine a world without smartphones and the Internet. Where and how we access information has changed dramatically over the last decade. Gone are the days of traveling to the library check out books and read printed journal articles. No longer simply storehouses of print information, libraries but now serve as starting points for searching online information that can be be accessed anywhere, any time and on any device. Library research that used to take hours or days can now be done in minutes. Online materials are often updated quickly, sometimes in hours rather than weeks or months, when researchers had to wait for updated print materials to be delivered.

Utilizing websites and databases now prevails as the most common method of conducting legal research. The sheer number and variety of resources can sometimes make it difficult to determine where to start, how to choose among similar resources, and how to keep up-to-date on what is available. This chapter provides an overview of vast range of legal materials available in libraries and on the web, and offers guidance for efficiently and effectively conducting legal research.

"The Learning Journey: Please Take Me with You" Free Download
Adelaide Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2014

MOLLY T. O'BRIEN, Australian National University - ANU College of Law

In the academy, we need not take our learning journeys alone. We can take our students with us. We can teach as we research and research as we teach. While it may seem that teaching and research compete for our time, energy and focus, they are also excellent collaborators. Research allows us to infuse the classroom with our values, new ideas and enthusiasm.

Teaching assists our research by prompting us to tell stories that clarify our research, and by giving us reasons to keep up with developments, update materials and design activities. Both give us a chance to hone our expertise, to gather motivation, to attract collaborators and to try out fresh perspectives.

Teaching and research both prosper on the learning journey together.

"They Know Their Colors: Using Color-Coded Comments to Facilitate Revisions" Free Download
The Law Teacher (Fall 2014)
U of Akron Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-11

SARAH J. MORATH, University of Akron - School of Law

Many 1L students do not understand that written comments have different purposes and varying degrees of importance. In addition, students often do not fully appreciate the importance of editing in stages. Color-coding comments is one way to help students both distinguish between different comments and incorporate comments during the revision process.

Color-coded comments are particularly useful early in the semester when students are revising drafts. Color-coded comments allow students to identify the “type? of comment (e.g. organizational vs. grammatical) before reading the substance of the comment, allowing for better comprehension of the comment. In addition, color coded comments can help students integrate comments in a systematic manner (e.g. addressing blue comments before yellow comments).

In this article, I explain how to color-code comments using Adobe Reader and discuss the benefits and drawbacks of color-coded comments.

"A Glossary for Experiential Education in Law Schools" Free Download

CYNTHIA F. ADCOCK, Charlotte School of Law
CYNTHIA BATT, Stetson University College of Law
SUSAN L. BROOKS, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law
JUSTINE A. DUNLAP, University of Massachusetts School of Law
CAROLYN WILKES KAAS, Quinnipiac University
KATHERINE R. KRUSE, Hamline University - School of Law
SUSAN MAZE-ROTHSTEIN, Northeastern University - School of Law
RUTH ANNE ROBBINS, Rutgers School of Law - Camden

Without a consensus on nomenclature, comparisons and even conversations have been difficult. Institutions use different terms when referring to the same types of learning experiences, and use the same terms -- such as “practicum? or even “clinic? – inconsistently. The increasing proliferation of inconsistent terminology for experiential education offerings makes it difficult for prospective students comparing law schools, for regulators evaluating law schools, for legal employers assessing prospective hires, and for law schools engaging in self-assessment and redesign.

This glossary was written by a collaboration of law teachers who are members of the Alliance for Experiential Learning in Law. We are from a range of law schools and teach using a range of methodologies. Our goal has been to create a common vocabulary to help bring clarity to the nomenclature chaos.

Terms are organized into three categories: pedagogy, program design and course design. Significant delineations include experiential education pedagogy, which includes education through supervised practice experiences as well as simulated practice experiences, and clinical legal education, which is limited to education through supervised practice experiences, whether taught solely by faculty or by faculty in partnership with legal professionals external to the law school. Significant inclusions are programs not always considered experiential education: Cooperative Education Program, Lawyering Skills Competition Program, Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research Program, and Pro Bono Program.

This glossary does not set forth evaluative criteria for experiential offerings, leaving that task to regulatory and other legal education groups. It does, however, provide a definition for the ideal experiential education program: an integrated lawyering program.

"CREAC in the Real World" Free Download
Cleveland State Law Review, Forthcoming

DIANE KRAFT, University of Kentucky College of Law

When law students are asked to describe how legal arguments are organized, they are likely to say something like “IRAC? or “CREAC? or “CRuPAC? or “TREAT.? Indeed, the organizational paradigm is a feature of many legal writing textbooks and is likely to be one of the first ideas a new law student will encounter in the legal writing classroom. While many legal writing professors find the use of such paradigms to be helpful to students, others find the paradigms simplistic and limiting.

This article will examine the extent to which common legal writing paradigms such as CREAC are used by attorneys in the “real world? of practice when writing on the kinds of issues law students may encounter in the first-year legal writing classroom. To that end, it will focus on the analysis of two factor-based criminal law issues: whether a defendant was in custody and whether a defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy. In focusing on “first-year? issues, the article seeks not to examine whether organizational paradigms are used at all in legal analysis, but to discover whether and how they are used when analyzing the same kinds of issues first-year law students analyze. If experienced attorneys writing on these issues do indeed use organizational paradigms in the same way many legal writing professors teach first-year law students, it is strong support for the continued use of organizational paradigms in the classroom. If not, it is perhaps time to reexamine their use.

In section I, the article will briefly review the rhetorical basis for the paradigms. Section II will review the central place organizational paradigms hold in legal writing pedagogy, as well as the resistance to those paradigms. Section III will examine how the organizational paradigms are used in appellate briefs filed in actual cases involving issues that first-year law students at the University of Kentucky College of Law have written about in their spring appellate brief assignments involving two hypothetical cases. Specifically, the article will show that while practicing attorneys writing on these issues do follow the general pattern of organizational paradigms like CREAC, they deviate from the paradigms in ways that suggest an increased emphasis on narrative as an essential part of persuasion above and beyond the story told in the Statement of the Case section of a brief. In section IV, the article will suggest ways that the findings of section III might be incorporated into legal writing pedagogy.


About this eJournal

This eJournal is designed to offer a vehicle for law teachers to share information and materials about teaching. All materials related to law teaching are encouraged. This includes casebooks, reviews of casebooks, supplementary materials (for your own or someone else's book), lecture notes, class summaries, outlines, syllabi, problems and other teaching materials. It also includes scholarship about teaching. We hope that Law Educator will grow in future years to include a full range of teaching materials, including PowerPoint slides, Excel spreadsheets, video content and other material.


To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email:

Distributed by

Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)



Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.

Advisory Board

Law Educator: Courses, Materials & Teaching eJournal

Judson Falknor Professor of Law, University of Washington - School of Law, Interim Director, UW Arctic Law and Policy Institute

Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law

University of Texas - School of Law, The Kay Bailey Hutchison Center for Energy, Law, and Business

J. Skelly Wright Professor of Law, Yale University - Law School

W.R. Irby Chair in Law, Tulane University Law School

Professor of Law, Gonzaga University - School of Law

Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School

Jefferson B. Fordham Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School

Professor of Law, University of California Hastings College of the Law

Pepperdine University - School of Law

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University - School of Law

Judge Jack & Lulu Lehman Professor of Law, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law

John A. and Elizabeth H. Sutro Professor of Law, Santa Clara University - School of Law