{"title":"美国法学院行业的法律与技术","authors":"Jessica L Fish, John D. Haskell","doi":"10.1515/gj-2022-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Law schools are increasingly pressured to rethink the character of next generation research, policy impact and curricular training in the wake of computer-oriented technologies. For all its heralded importance and the proliferation of markets and talk around the topic of law and technology within the law school industry, there are still no systematic scholarly attempts to understand how these dynamics currently play out in practice for law schools, what such an investigation might tell us about the present and future composition of legal academia, or how one might begin in the first place to even identify, gather and make sense of data toward these ends. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: on the one hand, to analyse the methodological and theoretical challenges involved in this sort of blended empirical/qualitative study that might be applied to similar studies in any global context, and on the other hand, to draw out a clearer picture of the dynamics of organizational change in US law schools in relation to the phenomena of digital technologies – and all too often underexplored, to unpack some of the dynamics of culture, profession and wealth at play. In more vernacular terms, our aim here is to get a better sense of how and what we talk about when we talk about law and technology as legal academics.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":"22 1","pages":"433 - 464"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law and Technology in the US Law School Industry\",\"authors\":\"Jessica L Fish, John D. Haskell\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/gj-2022-0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Law schools are increasingly pressured to rethink the character of next generation research, policy impact and curricular training in the wake of computer-oriented technologies. For all its heralded importance and the proliferation of markets and talk around the topic of law and technology within the law school industry, there are still no systematic scholarly attempts to understand how these dynamics currently play out in practice for law schools, what such an investigation might tell us about the present and future composition of legal academia, or how one might begin in the first place to even identify, gather and make sense of data toward these ends. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: on the one hand, to analyse the methodological and theoretical challenges involved in this sort of blended empirical/qualitative study that might be applied to similar studies in any global context, and on the other hand, to draw out a clearer picture of the dynamics of organizational change in US law schools in relation to the phenomena of digital technologies – and all too often underexplored, to unpack some of the dynamics of culture, profession and wealth at play. In more vernacular terms, our aim here is to get a better sense of how and what we talk about when we talk about law and technology as legal academics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Jurist\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"433 - 464\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Jurist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2022-0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2022-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Law schools are increasingly pressured to rethink the character of next generation research, policy impact and curricular training in the wake of computer-oriented technologies. For all its heralded importance and the proliferation of markets and talk around the topic of law and technology within the law school industry, there are still no systematic scholarly attempts to understand how these dynamics currently play out in practice for law schools, what such an investigation might tell us about the present and future composition of legal academia, or how one might begin in the first place to even identify, gather and make sense of data toward these ends. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: on the one hand, to analyse the methodological and theoretical challenges involved in this sort of blended empirical/qualitative study that might be applied to similar studies in any global context, and on the other hand, to draw out a clearer picture of the dynamics of organizational change in US law schools in relation to the phenomena of digital technologies – and all too often underexplored, to unpack some of the dynamics of culture, profession and wealth at play. In more vernacular terms, our aim here is to get a better sense of how and what we talk about when we talk about law and technology as legal academics.
期刊介绍:
Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.