PENELOPE NICHOLSON, University of Melbourne - Law School
Email: p.nicholson@unimelb.edu.au
QUAN HIEN NGUYEN, Swinburne University of Technology
Email: qnguyen@groupwise.swin.edu.au

This bibliography aims to assist legal practitioners, students and researchers navigate the diverse sources relevant to the Vietnamese legal system in the 21st century. Its focus is on secondary sources and does not include specific reference to Vietnamese laws. While the secondary sources listed are predominantly in English, consistent with the leadership of this journal, guidance on how to access Vietnamese laws and Vietnamese secondary sources has also been included.

This five-part bibliography includes a limited listing of bibliographies; secondary sources on Vietnamese law published in Vietnam; secondary sources in English on Vietnamese law across 18 legal categories; guidance on how to access Vietnamese laws and a listing of Vietnam law-focused internet sites, including those that canvas law reform issues. Each of these categories is preceded by a short analysis of the material included.

In particular, the authors suggest readings to enable new researchers to navigate the field quickly. With the exception of the 'history section', the emphasis in each category is on contemporary writing. The sources have been identified during the course of the authors' research and teaching on the Vietnamese legal system at the Asian Law Centre, University of Melbourne, Australia.

LISA MCELROY, Drexel University - Earle Mack School of Law
Email: lisa.t.mcelroy@drexel.edu

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.

JOAN MACLEOD HEMINWAY, University of Tennessee College of Law
Email: heminway@libra.law.utk.edu
J. ALLEN ROBERTS, Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP
Email: aroberts@wyattfirm.com

The coauthors have constructed a model bill of sale for use in connection with acquisitions, annotated with footnotes on substantive law and legal drafting issues. This model is intended to serve as a research piece, teaching tool, and practitioner resource. This instrument is part of a series of acquisition agreements and related ancillary contracts and instruments published by Transactions: Tennessee Journal of Business Law beginning in 2003.

JOAN MACLEOD HEMINWAY, University of Tennessee College of Law
Email: heminway@libra.law.utk.edu
JASON I. EPSTEIN, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC
Email: jepstein@bakerdonelson.com
W. EDWARD RAMAGE, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC
Email: eramage@bakerdonelson.com

The coauthors have constructed a model license agreement for use in connection with acquisitions, annotated with footnotes on substantive law and legal drafting issues. This model is intended to serve as a research piece, teaching tool, and practitioner resource. This agreement is part of a series of acquisition agreements and related ancillary contracts and instruments published by Transactions: Tennessee Journal of Business Law beginning in 2003.