Table of Contents

Reforming the Law School Curriculum from the Top Down

R. Michael Cassidy, Boston College Law School

Defining Experiential Legal Education

David I. C. Thomson, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

The Teaching of Procedure Across Common Law Systems

Erik S. Knutsen, Queen's University Faculty of Law
Thomas D. Rowe, Jr., Duke University - School of Law
David Bamford, Flinders University - School of Law
Shirley Shipman, Oxford Brookes University

Plane Meaning and Thought: Real-World Semantics and Fictions of Originalism

Harold Anthony Lloyd, Wake Forest University School of Law

Redistributive Pedagogy: A Case Study in Islamic Finance Education and Student-Centered Learning

David Lavoie, University of Connecticut - School of Business
Umar F Moghul, University of Connecticut - School of Law

HBO's the Wire and Criminal Procedure: A Match Made in Heaven

Brian Gallini, University of Arkansas - School of Law


LAW EDUCATOR: COURSES, MATERIALS & TEACHING eJOURNAL

"Reforming the Law School Curriculum from the Top Down" Free Download
Forthcoming, Journal of Legal Education, Vol. 64
Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 335

R. MICHAEL CASSIDY, Boston College Law School
Email:

With growing consensus that legal education is in turmoil if not in crisis, law schools need to take advantage of industry upheaval to catalyze innovation in the way they train their students. Curriculum reform, long the “third rail� of faculty politics, is now essential if some law schools are going to survive the present tsunami of low enrollments and stagnant hiring. One cautiously optimistic note within this doomsday symphony is that law school deans are now in extremely strong bargaining positions with their faculties and boards of trustees with respect to curriculum innovation.

In this essay, the author proposes a pivotal reform to the third year curriculum involving team-taught “Advanced Legal Problem Solving� workshops in subject specific areas, and describes the precise structure, content and staffing of such capstone courses. He argues that such workshops would significantly enhance the preparation of law students for entry into the profession, and would create an efficient and cost-effective route for law schools to satisfy rigorous new ABA accreditation standards regarding experiential learning and outcomes assessment.

"Defining Experiential Legal Education" Free Download
1 J. Experiential Learning ____ (2014 Forthcoming)
U Denver Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-50

DAVID I. C. THOMSON, University of Denver Sturm College of Law
Email:

Legal Education in the United States is undergoing a renaissance. In many ways, that renaissance has been building and growing for the last two decades, but in the last several years it has truly begun to flourish. Much of the focus of the renaissance has been in practical (sometimes called “practice-based�) legal education. Of course practical training was the only kind available until about 1870, so practical legal education is not new; indeed it has been around for over 100 years. But what is new is the extraordinary growth and hybridization of experiential learning in law schools across the country in the last few years.

As with many such periods of significant growth and change, however, some classification and a deeper understanding of the types and methods of experiential learning in law schools would be helpful. Definitions and methods for classification are important because they provide a foundation for understanding and clear communication. This article seeks to provide that definitional understanding, with the goal of speeding up this good work, not putting it in a box. It provides a definition of experiential learning for legal education, as well as a method for application of the definition to courses currently in the law school curriculum as well as those that might be considered for inclusion in the curriculum of the future.

Part I of the article provides a brief history of experiential learning in law, explores the major sources for a possible new definition of experiential learning, and describes the limitations of the definitional elements that we currently have. Part II argues that the definitions we currently have are not only limited, but their limitations are being exposed by the growth and variety in experiential learning opportunities currently being offered in many law schools. Part III offers a new definition for experiential learning in law, together with a series of questions that can be used in applying the definition. Finally, Part IV offers application of the new definition to examples of course work that are currently being offered in law schools around the country, so that the reader can see the definition at work.

"The Teaching of Procedure Across Common Law Systems" Free Download
(2013) 51 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 1

ERIK S. KNUTSEN, Queen's University Faculty of Law
Email:
THOMAS D. ROWE, JR., Duke University - School of Law
Email:
DAVID BAMFORD, Flinders University - School of Law
Email:
SHIRLEY SHIPMAN, Oxford Brookes University
Email:

What difference does the teaching of procedure make to legal education, legal scholarship, the legal profession, and civil justice reform? This first of four articles on the teaching of procedure canvasses the landscape of current approaches to the teaching of procedure in four legal systems — the United States, Canada, Australia, and England and Wales — surveying the place of procedure in the law school curriculum and in professional training, the kinds of subjects that “procedure� encompasses, and the various ways in which procedure is learned. Little sustained reflection has been carried out as to the import and impact of this longstanding law school subject. Through a comparative approach, this series of articles explores what difference the approach a particular jurisdiction has chosen to adopt makes for legal education, legal scholarship, the practice of law and the profession, and to civil justice reform in our legal system.

"Plane Meaning and Thought: Real-World Semantics and Fictions of Originalism" Free Download

HAROLD ANTHONY LLOYD, Wake Forest University School of Law
Email:

This article explores how meaning and thought work in the real-world of human experience. In doing so, it explores five basic planes or levels of such meaning and thought: references, issues, rules, applications of rules, and conclusions. It also explores framing, metaphor, and narrative in constructing such planes or levels of meaning and thought as well as some basic resulting forms of thought. Additionally, it examines original meaning as a cautionary negative example of how real-world meaning and thought do not and cannot work. Given the flexibility of framing involved in the multiple levels of real-world meaning and thought, originalism cannot sustain its claims of greater objectivity when compared to other interpretive approaches.

"Redistributive Pedagogy: A Case Study in Islamic Finance Education and Student-Centered Learning" Free Download
Albany Government Law Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2014

DAVID LAVOIE, University of Connecticut - School of Business
UMAR F MOGHUL, University of Connecticut - School of Law
Email:

A case study of a novel course designed at UConn School of Law in Islamic finance and investment law.

"HBO's the Wire and Criminal Procedure: A Match Made in Heaven" Free Download
64 J. Legal Educ. 114, August 2014

BRIAN GALLINI, University of Arkansas - School of Law
Email:

Fans of The Wire know Bunk. Those fans who are legal minded may even remember, in the first scene of the first episode of Season 5, when Bunk masterfully interrogates a helpless suspect. I cannot imagine a better introduction to the Fifth Amendment materials in the Criminal Procedure course.

But The Wire’s five seasons offer more than just helpful scenes. Rather, the show raises a diverse array of Fourth and Fifth Amendment issues that, I believe, can assist in teaching the Criminal Procedure course throughout the semester by keying all the course’s topics to The Wire. I proceed in this piece by offering (1) why The Wire makes for such a compelling pedagogical tool, (2) why a “one show� approach is superior to using sporadic clips from a variety of sources, and (3) then offering some concrete examples of how the clips are helpful on a class-by-class basis.

^top

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.

Submissions

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: RPS@SSRN.com

Distributed by

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

Directors

LSN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS

BERNARD S. BLACK
Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Email: bblack@northwestern.edu

RONALD J. GILSON
Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Email: rgilson@leland.stanford.edu

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

Advisory Board

Law Educator: Courses, Materials & Teaching eJournal

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

DOROTHY ANDREA BROWN
Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law

JOHN S. DZIENKOWSKI
University of Texas - School of Law, The Center for Global Energy, International Arbitration, and Environmental Law

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

JAMES RUSSELL GORDLEY
W.R. Irby Chair in Law, Tulane University Law School

GERALD HESS
Professor of Law, Gonzaga University - School of Law

CYNTHIA LEE
Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School

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

DAVID I. LEVINE
Professor of Law, University of California Hastings College of the Law

GRANT S. NELSON
Pepperdine University - School of Law

ROGER E. SCHECHTER
affiliation not provided to SSRN

JOAN M. SHAUGHNESSY
Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University - School of Law

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

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