This book addresses the lawyer well-being crisis by summarizing the studies that demonstrate that law students and lawyers suffer from high rates of anxiety, depression, burnout, substance misuse, and suicide risk; explaining relevant parts of the brain, and how stress impacts lawyer brain function; reviewing the neuroscience and psychology research that links brain health and mental strength to well-being; and providing an action plan for lawyers to enhance their well-being, optimize their performance, and improve their brain health and mental strength. The Introduction and Chapter One of this work in progress are available for download here.
{"title":"The Lawyer Brain - Transform your Well-being and Develop a Performance Edge","authors":"Debra Austin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3761367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3761367","url":null,"abstract":"This book addresses the lawyer well-being crisis by summarizing the studies that demonstrate that law students and lawyers suffer from high rates of anxiety, depression, burnout, substance misuse, and suicide risk; explaining relevant parts of the brain, and how stress impacts lawyer brain function; reviewing the neuroscience and psychology research that links brain health and mental strength to well-being; and providing an action plan for lawyers to enhance their well-being, optimize their performance, and improve their brain health and mental strength. \u0000 \u0000The Introduction and Chapter One of this work in progress are available for download here.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132851652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article analyzes data collected in an empirical study of citation metrics. Between February 1, 2019 and April 30, 2019, the authors collected citation data from Google Scholar, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, SSRN, and Digital Commons repositories on randomly selected faculty members at U.S. law schools for the purpose of answering questions regarding fit and utility of citation metrics. Analysis of the citation data examines the impact of adoption of scholarly profiles, gender, and stage in the profession, and discipline, on exposure on citation with the conclusion that exposure results in increased citations.
{"title":"The Scholarly Impact Matrix: An Empirical Study of How Multiple Metrics Create an Informed Story of a Scholar's Work","authors":"Caroline L. Osborne, Stephanie C. Miller","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3582607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3582607","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes data collected in an empirical study of citation metrics. Between February 1, 2019 and April 30, 2019, the authors collected citation data from Google Scholar, HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, SSRN, and Digital Commons repositories on randomly selected faculty members at U.S. law schools for the purpose of answering questions regarding fit and utility of citation metrics. Analysis of the citation data examines the impact of adoption of scholarly profiles, gender, and stage in the profession, and discipline, on exposure on citation with the conclusion that exposure results in increased citations.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134495449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Henry G. Manne described himself as the only full-time missionary for law and economics from the first glimmerings of that subject. This paper deals with the period of Manne’s career when he first assumed this role, which coincides with his time at the University of Miami Law School (1974-1980). Prior to Miami, Manne had formulated a vision for law and economics, and had developed prototypical structures for funding and running interdisciplinary conferences and intensive economics courses for law professors. Manne professionalized these at Miami, using the organizational vehicle of the Law and Economics Center (LEC) that he set up and ran until his departure. Over the course of this period, Manne recruited and invested heavily in teaching, research and conference administration capacities. The LEC branched out, particularly into the policy arena, multiplying the frequency and diversity of activities pursued. It introduced innovative ways of linking economics and legal practice, economists and legal professionals, and played a pivotal role in the integration of law and economics as intellectually integrated disciplines.
亨利·g·曼恩(Henry G. Manne)称自己是法律和经济学的唯一全职传教士。本文讨论的是曼恩最初担任这一角色时的职业生涯，这段时间与他在迈阿密大学法学院(1974-1980)的时间相吻合。在迈阿密之前，曼恩已经制定了法律和经济学的愿景，并开发了资助和运行跨学科会议的原型结构，并为法学教授提供了密集的经济学课程。在迈阿密，曼恩利用他建立并经营的法律与经济中心(LEC)的组织机构，将这些活动专业化，直到他离开。在此期间，Manne在教学、研究和会议管理能力方面进行了大量招聘和投资。立法委员会扩大了范围，特别是进入了政策领域，增加了所进行活动的频率和多样性。它引入了经济学与法律实践、经济学家与法律专业人士联系的创新方式，并在法学与经济学作为智力整合学科的整合中发挥了关键作用。
{"title":"Law and Economics Under the Palms: Henry Manne at the University of Miami, 1974–1980","authors":"David Gindis","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3567105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3567105","url":null,"abstract":"Henry G. Manne described himself as the only full-time missionary for law and economics from the first glimmerings of that subject. This paper deals with the period of Manne’s career when he first assumed this role, which coincides with his time at the University of Miami Law School (1974-1980). Prior to Miami, Manne had formulated a vision for law and economics, and had developed prototypical structures for funding and running interdisciplinary conferences and intensive economics courses for law professors. Manne professionalized these at Miami, using the organizational vehicle of the Law and Economics Center (LEC) that he set up and ran until his departure. Over the course of this period, Manne recruited and invested heavily in teaching, research and conference administration capacities. The LEC branched out, particularly into the policy arena, multiplying the frequency and diversity of activities pursued. It introduced innovative ways of linking economics and legal practice, economists and legal professionals, and played a pivotal role in the integration of law and economics as intellectually integrated disciplines.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121612450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-11-13DOI: 10.17159/1727-3781/2019/v22i0a4976
A. Diala
Fees-related protests in South African universities have pushed the decolonisation of the law curriculum to the front burner of academic discourse. As part of the curriculum, African customary law was marginalised in the courts, distorted by policy makers, and largely labelled as unfriendly to women and younger male children in issues of marriage, property, and succession. However, this normative system is shaped by the manner in which people adapt norms with agrarian origins to the socio-economic changes caused by colonial rule. In this historical context, scholars focus more on conflict of laws than on people's adaptation of indigenous norms to socioeconomic changes. So, in what ways should universities handle the pedagogy of African customary law? This article argues that colonialism endowed Africans with a new socio-legal identity, which questions the mainstream conceptualisation of customary law into "official" and "living" versions. Accordingly, the law curriculum should reflect this new identity and acknowledge the self-sustaining legacy of colonialism as a reality check on decolonisation. As the article suggests, re-conceptualising African customary law offers a framework for legal integration, especially in South Africa.
{"title":"Curriculum Decolonisation and Revisionist Pedagogy of African Customary Law","authors":"A. Diala","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2019/v22i0a4976","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2019/v22i0a4976","url":null,"abstract":"Fees-related protests in South African universities have pushed the decolonisation of the law curriculum to the front burner of academic discourse. As part of the curriculum, African customary law was marginalised in the courts, distorted by policy makers, and largely labelled as unfriendly to women and younger male children in issues of marriage, property, and succession. However, this normative system is shaped by the manner in which people adapt norms with agrarian origins to the socio-economic changes caused by colonial rule. In this historical context, scholars focus more on conflict of laws than on people's adaptation of indigenous norms to socioeconomic changes. So, in what ways should universities handle the pedagogy of African customary law? This article argues that colonialism endowed Africans with a new socio-legal identity, which questions the mainstream conceptualisation of customary law into \"official\" and \"living\" versions. Accordingly, the law curriculum should reflect this new identity and acknowledge the self-sustaining legacy of colonialism as a reality check on decolonisation. As the article suggests, re-conceptualising African customary law offers a framework for legal integration, especially in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"109 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132402882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Russian Abstract: Исследуются вопросы интеграции медиаобразования, правового просвещения и электронной демократии на основе создания единого информационно-правового пространства. Информационно-правовое пространство рассматривается как фундамент электронного обучения и основа правового просвещения на основе технологий и методологии разработанной наукой медиаобразования.
English Abstract: It considers the problems of integration of media education, legal education and e-democracy on the basis of creating a single information and legal space are examined. The information and legal space is considered as the foundation of e-learning and the basis of legal education on the basis of technologies and methodology developed by the science of media education.
{"title":"Правовое просвещение, электронная демократия и медиаобразование: основы эффективной интеграции (Legal Education, e-Democracy and Media Education: The Basis of Effective Integration)","authors":"Antonov Jaroslav Valerievich","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3293948","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3293948","url":null,"abstract":"<b>Russian Abstract:</b> Исследуются вопросы интеграции медиаобразования, правового просвещения и электронной демократии на основе создания единого информационно-правового пространства. Информационно-правовое пространство рассматривается как фундамент электронного обучения и основа правового просвещения на основе технологий и методологии разработанной наукой медиаобразования.<br><br><b>English Abstract:</b> It considers the problems of integration of media education, legal education and e-democracy on the basis of creating a single information and legal space are examined. The information and legal space is considered as the foundation of e-learning and the basis of legal education on the basis of technologies and methodology developed by the science of media education.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130336169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since its inception, the Langdellian case method has been used to teach legal analysis and reasoning to generations of U.S. law students. For nearly as long, business school students have used their own version of the case method to learn and practice management decision-making. In law school, a ‘case’ is an appellate court decision, which students must analyze in preparation for Socratic questioning. To business students, a ‘case’ is a narrative problem they must solve, before debating and defending their solutions in a moderated classroom discussion. This paper contrasts the two case methods, first defining the methods themselves, as well as related concepts including Socratic dialogue and problem-based learning. It then asserts that neither the law school nor the business school case method is optimal to prepare students for bar admission and the practice of law. Following a detailed examination of both methods, with particular emphasis on the role of group work, the focus then shifts to a proposed Integrated Legal Practice Method. This proposed method draws on business-school case teaching, in an effort to address the shortcomings of current U.S. legal education by providing students not only with substantive and adjective legal knowledge, but also with the skills necessary for legal practice.
{"title":"Doing Law School Wrong: Case Teaching and an Integrated Legal Practice Method","authors":"G. Marsden","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3284875","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3284875","url":null,"abstract":"Since its inception, the Langdellian case method has been used to teach legal analysis and reasoning to generations of U.S. law students. For nearly as long, business school students have used their own version of the case method to learn and practice management decision-making. In law school, a ‘case’ is an appellate court decision, which students must analyze in preparation for Socratic questioning. To business students, a ‘case’ is a narrative problem they must solve, before debating and defending their solutions in a moderated classroom discussion. \u0000 \u0000This paper contrasts the two case methods, first defining the methods themselves, as well as related concepts including Socratic dialogue and problem-based learning. It then asserts that neither the law school nor the business school case method is optimal to prepare students for bar admission and the practice of law. Following a detailed examination of both methods, with particular emphasis on the role of group work, the focus then shifts to a proposed Integrated Legal Practice Method. This proposed method draws on business-school case teaching, in an effort to address the shortcomings of current U.S. legal education by providing students not only with substantive and adjective legal knowledge, but also with the skills necessary for legal practice.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114056152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The legal profession is not immune from the impact of rapid technological advances. Today, it is difficult to locate anyone who has not reached some level of acceptance of that truth. These advances are not limited to the way that information is stored, accessed and retrieved – though the speed at which vast amounts of material may be searched and sorted is radically transforming (most obviously) the laborious process of discovery. Certainly, technological developments have increased the pace and efficiency with which traditional legal services are provided. However, the more drastic changes are those that threaten to displace or rival the provision of those services themselves by the introduction of Artificial Intelligence and the development of platforms for cheap and easily obtainable automated legal advice. Depending on your perspective all of this may be highly attractive and liberating or perhaps a little anxiety inducing. But it cannot be ignored. That is another truth which it is hard to find anyone deny. Legal educators are as attuned to the need to respond to these changes as those in legal practice – indeed possibly more so given that we work on the frontline of intergenerational change as students show us entirely new ways of ‘being’ in the world, of connecting and working with others. So calls for changes in what and how we teach in law schools have long since passed the point of being cutting edge or revolutionary. The need to respond to so-called ‘digital disruption’ is unarguable. But there is a risk that legal educators will react in an alarmist and unmediated fashion to the future challenges of a changed legal services market – losing sight of what makes legal education distinctive and, we believe, will continue to be valued. We suggest in this article that we should appreciate the changes bearing down on us as creating opportunities. These are not only for an embrace of all that is new, but also for the enrichment of those traditional and defining features of legal education that may be expected to endure, if not actually increase in value, as legal practice continues its transformation.
{"title":"Keep Calm and Carry on: Why the Increasing Automation of Legal Services Should Deepen and Not Diminish Legal Education","authors":"G. Appleby, Sean Brennan, Andrew Lynch","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3233424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3233424","url":null,"abstract":"The legal profession is not immune from the impact of rapid technological advances. Today, it is difficult to locate anyone who has not reached some level of acceptance of that truth. These advances are not limited to the way that information is stored, accessed and retrieved – though the speed at which vast amounts of material may be searched and sorted is radically transforming (most obviously) the laborious process of discovery. Certainly, technological developments have increased the pace and efficiency with which traditional legal services are provided. However, the more drastic changes are those that threaten to displace or rival the provision of those services themselves by the introduction of Artificial Intelligence and the development of platforms for cheap and easily obtainable automated legal advice. Depending on your perspective all of this may be highly attractive and liberating or perhaps a little anxiety inducing. But it cannot be ignored. That is another truth which it is hard to find anyone deny. Legal educators are as attuned to the need to respond to these changes as those in legal practice – indeed possibly more so given that we work on the frontline of intergenerational change as students show us entirely new ways of ‘being’ in the world, of connecting and working with others. So calls for changes in what and how we teach in law schools have long since passed the point of being cutting edge or revolutionary. The need to respond to so-called ‘digital disruption’ is unarguable. But there is a risk that legal educators will react in an alarmist and unmediated fashion to the future challenges of a changed legal services market – losing sight of what makes legal education distinctive and, we believe, will continue to be valued. We suggest in this article that we should appreciate the changes bearing down on us as creating opportunities. These are not only for an embrace of all that is new, but also for the enrichment of those traditional and defining features of legal education that may be expected to endure, if not actually increase in value, as legal practice continues its transformation.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"213 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122849904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores the long-term challenge of legal education’s financial viability and focuses on the business model that serves contemporary legal education. That model – based on a value proposition – sees long-term student loans and plentiful lawyer jobs as the way to underwrite legal education’s sustainability, even as tuition rises. Loans and jobs are inextricably connected; the idea being that student debt can be manageably repaid over some amount of time after graduating and obtaining a well-paying lawyer job. The paper is divided into three main parts. The first looks to the past in order to understand the business model – the value proposition, its development, and its logic. In doing so it will talk about the one factor that makes the value proposition viable – loans, and especially the role of the federal government with respect to loans. It also talks about the intertwined issues of cost and access to legal education, which became increasingly important in the development of the business model. The second provides an empirical context for the concerns raised by those critics. It does so by exploring data (some likely familiar, but perhaps not all) on key patterns and changes in legal education since the late 1940s. The third part treats the patterns and changes in enrollments in the wake of the Great Recession as a rough natural experiment that allows us to consider whether the critic’s fear of a day of reckoning for value proposition has now finally arrived and what it means.
{"title":"The Perennial (and Stubborn) Challenge of Cost, Affordability, and Access in Legal Education: 'We Will Continue to Muddle Through'","authors":"S. Daniels","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3058392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3058392","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the long-term challenge of legal education’s financial viability and focuses on the business model that serves contemporary legal education. That model – based on a value proposition – sees long-term student loans and plentiful lawyer jobs as the way to underwrite legal education’s sustainability, even as tuition rises. Loans and jobs are inextricably connected; the idea being that student debt can be manageably repaid over some amount of time after graduating and obtaining a well-paying lawyer job. The paper is divided into three main parts. The first looks to the past in order to understand the business model – the value proposition, its development, and its logic. In doing so it will talk about the one factor that makes the value proposition viable – loans, and especially the role of the federal government with respect to loans. It also talks about the intertwined issues of cost and access to legal education, which became increasingly important in the development of the business model. The second provides an empirical context for the concerns raised by those critics. It does so by exploring data (some likely familiar, but perhaps not all) on key patterns and changes in legal education since the late 1940s. The third part treats the patterns and changes in enrollments in the wake of the Great Recession as a rough natural experiment that allows us to consider whether the critic’s fear of a day of reckoning for value proposition has now finally arrived and what it means.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133185236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2017-05-29DOI: 10.22329/WYAJ.V34I1.5006
O. Ha-Redeye
With law school graduates encountering increased difficulty in securing articling positions, legal incubators are an alternative way of providing practical training and mentorship opportunities for young practitioners. Not only do they have the potential to help launch careers in law, but they can also play a major role in increasing access to justice. Though legal incubators have been gaining popularity in law schools across the United States, they are still a novel concept in Canada. This article discusses the resources and practice models used by Fleet Street Law, a law practice in Toronto that evolved into the first legal incubator in Canada. The use of innovative business models allowed for greater service of low income and marginalized populations, especially on a “low-bono” rate, and also assisted in providing essential supports for racialized and minority lawyers early in their career. The flexible and innovative nature of a legal incubator was beneficial for the purposes of experimentation, but there were challenges associated with cost and long-term participation. The model of a practitioner-based incubator, as an alternative to traditional-type clinics, should be strongly considered by law schools to help address some of the market needs in the legal community today.
随着法学院毕业生越来越难以获得文章职位，法律孵化器是为年轻从业者提供实践培训和指导机会的另一种方式。他们不仅有潜力帮助开展法律职业，而且还可以在增加诉诸司法方面发挥重要作用。尽管法律孵化器在美国各地的法学院越来越受欢迎，但在加拿大，这仍然是一个新概念。本文讨论了多伦多的Fleet Street Law所使用的资源和实践模式。Fleet Street Law是加拿大第一个法律孵化器。利用创新的商业模式，可以为低收入和边缘人口提供更多的服务，特别是以“低无偿”费率，并有助于为种族化和少数民族律师在其职业生涯早期提供必要的支持。法律孵化器的灵活和创新性质有利于实验目的，但在成本和长期参与方面存在挑战。以从业者为基础的孵化器模式，作为传统类型诊所的替代方案，应该得到法学院的大力考虑，以帮助解决当今法律界的一些市场需求。
{"title":"Cold, Hard Justice Lessons from the Fleet: Innovating from the Bottom Up","authors":"O. Ha-Redeye","doi":"10.22329/WYAJ.V34I1.5006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22329/WYAJ.V34I1.5006","url":null,"abstract":"With law school graduates encountering increased difficulty in securing articling positions, legal incubators are an alternative way of providing practical training and mentorship opportunities for young practitioners. Not only do they have the potential to help launch careers in law, but they can also play a major role in increasing access to justice. Though legal incubators have been gaining popularity in law schools across the United States, they are still a novel concept in Canada. This article discusses the resources and practice models used by Fleet Street Law, a law practice in Toronto that evolved into the first legal incubator in Canada. The use of innovative business models allowed for greater service of low income and marginalized populations, especially on a “low-bono” rate, and also assisted in providing essential supports for racialized and minority lawyers early in their career. The flexible and innovative nature of a legal incubator was beneficial for the purposes of experimentation, but there were challenges associated with cost and long-term participation. The model of a practitioner-based incubator, as an alternative to traditional-type clinics, should be strongly considered by law schools to help address some of the market needs in the legal community today.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126007076","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A range of forces are arrayed against the institutions of the American legal profession that stand to undermine their foundations and challenge their continued existence, at least in their current form. These threats, which contain technological, economic, and social components, and are emanating from both domestic and transnational sources, require the legal profession in general and law schools in particular to respond to the new reality of the contemporary age and adapt to it, without losing sight of the core social justice principles upon which the profession should be based: access to justice, protection of civil and political rights, and preservation of the rule of law. The threats to the legal profession and law schools require an assessment of what lawyers do best and how they can best continue to serve a critical role in society. At the heart of lawyering is problem solving, and for lawyers, and law schools, ensuring that they can continue to deliver strategic, meaningful, and effective problem-solving services in the 21st century will help determine the role of the legal profession and law schools well into the future. What are the problem-solving skills that the legal profession must possess and that law schools must instill in their students given the forces that are impacting the practice of law? Ten years ago, author Dan Pink published the prescient A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future. In it, Pink explores the ways that phenomena such as automation and the ability to outsource a great deal of work traditionally performed by knowledge workers has posed challenges for those in many industries to remain relevant and viable in the contemporary age. While these forces are affecting many different sectors, the legal profession, and the law schools that educate its members, are feeling these threats acutely. Pink offers strategies for thriving in this environment, arguing that this new era, what he calls the Conceptual Age, requires a new set of skills and aptitudes that he posits are those that tend to be dominated by the right hemisphere of the brain, such as the ability to think conceptually and metaphorically, to empathize with others, to see and recognize patterns, and to appreciate and communicate compelling narratives. These skills, which he calls the aptitudes of the Conceptual Age, include design, empathy, story, symphony, play, and meaning. Such skills are necessary to thrive in the contemporary environment and deliver value to communities and markets. This Article explores how these aptitudes can be taught in a law school setting, focusing on one problem solving course through which students engage in real- world problem solving in ways that invoke the aptitudes of the Conceptual Age. Following this examination, it also explores the implications of teaching these aptitudes in a law school setting and the role they may play in both the legal profession in general and law schools in particular.
{"title":"Law and Social Innovation: Lawyering in the Conceptual Age","authors":"Raymond H. Brescia","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2828107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2828107","url":null,"abstract":"A range of forces are arrayed against the institutions of the American legal profession that stand to undermine their foundations and challenge their continued existence, at least in their current form. These threats, which contain technological, economic, and social components, and are emanating from both domestic and transnational sources, require the legal profession in general and law schools in particular to respond to the new reality of the contemporary age and adapt to it, without losing sight of the core social justice principles upon which the profession should be based: access to justice, protection of civil and political rights, and preservation of the rule of law. The threats to the legal profession and law schools require an assessment of what lawyers do best and how they can best continue to serve a critical role in society. At the heart of lawyering is problem solving, and for lawyers, and law schools, ensuring that they can continue to deliver strategic, meaningful, and effective problem-solving services in the 21st century will help determine the role of the legal profession and law schools well into the future. What are the problem-solving skills that the legal profession must possess and that law schools must instill in their students given the forces that are impacting the practice of law? Ten years ago, author Dan Pink published the prescient A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers Will Rule the Future. In it, Pink explores the ways that phenomena such as automation and the ability to outsource a great deal of work traditionally performed by knowledge workers has posed challenges for those in many industries to remain relevant and viable in the contemporary age. While these forces are affecting many different sectors, the legal profession, and the law schools that educate its members, are feeling these threats acutely. Pink offers strategies for thriving in this environment, arguing that this new era, what he calls the Conceptual Age, requires a new set of skills and aptitudes that he posits are those that tend to be dominated by the right hemisphere of the brain, such as the ability to think conceptually and metaphorically, to empathize with others, to see and recognize patterns, and to appreciate and communicate compelling narratives. These skills, which he calls the aptitudes of the Conceptual Age, include design, empathy, story, symphony, play, and meaning. Such skills are necessary to thrive in the contemporary environment and deliver value to communities and markets. This Article explores how these aptitudes can be taught in a law school setting, focusing on one problem solving course through which students engage in real- world problem solving in ways that invoke the aptitudes of the Conceptual Age. Following this examination, it also explores the implications of teaching these aptitudes in a law school setting and the role they may play in both the legal profession in general and law schools in particular.","PeriodicalId":337841,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education eJournal","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121160582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：