Browsing Tag

Exercises/Activities

Better Conversations? Let’s Talk About It. (Part 2)

By: Christopher Corts, Professor of Law, Legal Practice, University of Richmond School of Law

Hello, again, readers! Today I am writing the second of a two-part series devoted to the art of facilitating better conversations about controversial topics. When we convene these kinds of conversations, we need to be especially attentive to the possibility that some number of listeners are likely to hear perceptions, opinions, beliefs, and values that are in tension with, and sometimes oppositional to, their own—and that some speakers will need to feel comfortable uttering those kinds of polarizing comments, too.

Last month, in Part I, I explained why I think new ABA Standards 303(b) and (c) present an important opportunity for law schools to have some hard but necessary public conversations about racism, bias, and inter-cultural competency. I suggested that, if we are going to effectively teach students how to internalize a professional responsibility for clients and the integrity of the legal system [as we must, under Standard 303(b)], we will necessarily need to help students learn how to detect, address, and overcome the pernicious effects of racism and bias [Standard 303(c)] in our own profession. And: in our own institutions, which collectively help to constitute the state of “the profession” that we are all obligated to critically assess, strengthen, and reform.

All of this means that we will need to facilitate a different kind of conversation within our communities—one that does not involve debating, arguing, or problem-solving. We need conversations that can help to clear the air, establish the state of things as they are (and not as we hope or wish them to be), and give public voice to important, deeply held viewpoints that some stakeholders might be reluctant to share, especially if they perceive those viewpoints to be at odds with official messaging or apparently-prevailing sentiments within the group.

When I facilitate these kinds of hard conversations, I have four primary, process-oriented goals in view (which, astute readers will notice, could also be read as value statements):

give every person an opportunity to speak about a given subject (or: to decline to speak on that subject);
elicit candid and forthright comments about things that are most meaningful to the speaker, especially the kinds of statements about deeply-held personal perceptions, opinions, values, and convictions that are at odds with official messaging or prevailing opinions in a group (which may not ordinarily be heard in public, community-wide conversations that are efficiently managed to meet the aims of organizers running an agenda that they set);
strive—with curiosity, compassion, and non-attachment to any particular outcome—to discover the full, true range of views that constitute the community as it just-is;
create opportunities to be together as a community through periods of shared silence (rather than defaulting to treating silence as something to be feared, avoided, or filled with noise).

All of this takes a lot of time to do well. Without giving adequate time, we cannot hope to let everyone speak, cannot build trust within the group, cannot elicit comments about the deepest and most meaningful things, cannot fully hear and appreciate the true state of things, especially when the true state of things includes profound, meaningful disagreements.

Today, in Part II, I want to give some concrete suggestions for how to plan, stage, and facilitate these kinds of public conversations to achieve the goals outlined above. We need rules and norms to keep everyone invested in the same process. And to do that we need tools and techniques to help us make these conversations slower, less reactive, more intentional, more inclusive, and personally-meaningful to each individual present.

Birthed in my own experiences with inter-faith and ecumenical dialogues while completing my seminary education prior to law school, the suggestions that follow have been refined and further developed during my past decade in legal education and service to the broader community that goes with it. These suggestions reflect communication principles and practical techniques that will be familiar to anyone who has ever experienced non-violent communication, mindful communication…or a Quaker meeting.

Whenever I approach these kinds of difficult conversations, my aim is to try and find a way to facilitate mutual compassion, respect, and trust among participants. Trust makes broader participation more likely, and it makes deeper participation more likely, too. In my experience, when trust exists, it can improve the quality of conversation by improving the likelihood that candid, authentic, contrarian points of view will be voiced—and heard.

Here are a few ideas for how you might facilitate these conversations in a more inclusive and meaningful way. In addition to increasing the likelihood of quality participation from the greatest number of participants (as speakers and listeners), the rules in this list are designed to improve access to the conversation by (a) reducing the costs of speaking for socially-anxious and marginalized participants, while also (b) reducing the possibility that socially-confident participants will be able to grandstand or dominate the discourse.

Consult with experts. The suggestions I am offering are process-oriented. But, especially when it comes to matters of racism, bias, and inter-cultural difference, in the interest of pursuing institutional-level policy reforms—as we must—we all benefit from expert help. There can be no substitute for the wisdom and guidance of experts who have dedicated their professional lives to helping institutions address and fix the wide range of complex problems caused by bias, racism, and a lack of inter-cultural fluency in our organizations.And, at the individual level, we can all benefit from consulting books written by experts. I recommend Rhonda Magee (a lawyer and law professor) and Ruth King (founder of the Mindful of Race Institute, LLC). Both are well-published and write in an accessible way that is especially helpful for deftly navigating the intersection of mindful communication and race in a way that invites maximum participation and deep, compassionate engagement.
Facilitate small group conversations. Public conversations that elicit maximum participation and candor are not possible in mass groups. The smaller the group, the more questions that can be asked and the more topics that can be covered in the same amount of time.How small do the groups need to be? In my experience, six to eight is optimal (for reasons that I hope will become more obvious as you keep reading). Ten to twelve is doable. More than twelve will severely undercut your ability to realistically include all speakers and invite them to contribute with depth and authenticity. This takes many facilitators for many groups, potentially, but one organizing facilitator can come up with the question prompts and guidelines for all of the groups to use and then just leave it to a number of volunteer facilitators to implement at the small-group level. If they can read and follow directions, then they can facilitate.
Seat each small group in a circle. Staging matters. When you facilitate a hard conversation, you have the ability to stage it in a way that can make participation easier—or more burdensome. By creating a circle for conversation, you can help speakers speak and listeners hear.This is not just about achieving a certain form; it is more than just staging and optics. It is also a show of values. And it enhances superior functioning in the group. Sitting in a circle eliminates hierarchies that exist when a podium, stage, microphone, or another arrangement that confers a superior position to one person (the speaker, usually) distinct from all others. In a circle, everyone is seated side-by-side. There is no privileged place for the facilitator, no privileged place for any speaker. There is no person drawing focus in the center of the circle, and no person is (literally or figuratively) outside of the circle. Everyone can see everyone else as an equal within the same circle of concern.
Create rules that make candid participation possible for the most people. To achieve maximum participation, we need to create conditions that make it more likely that everyone, wherever they sit, will feel comfortable offering statements of deeply-held conviction, personal experience, and subjective perception. Some people may be more inclined to do this than others by nature, culture, or socialization, but we want to make it easier for everyone to feel safe bringing hidden things to light—especially sincere statements of personal perception, value, opinion, or belief.Setting rules for equitable, inclusive discourse from the outset of your conversation can help. I will reserve a future blog post to explore the fine art of crafting a beautiful reflection question. But for now, the basic idea is that you want to create questions that are open-ended enough to elicit feedback that is most meaningful to each speaker, but targeted enough to elicit the kinds of hidden opinions and contrarian points of view that you, as facilitator, have designed this conversation to expose.At a minimum, you need rules about speaking and listening that can (1) establish confidentiality, (2) prevent interruption and cross-talk, (3) prevent a small number of participants from dominating the discourse, (4) prevent certain other participants from hiding or refraining from speaking (when they would be willing to do so, given the chance), (5) create a clear order of conversation that each participant can follow, (6) encourage speakers to speak freely and respectfully, (7) encourage listeners to hear charitably, and (8) invite everyone to strive for respectful, compassionate conversation that you can collectively (as a group) define for one another.[In my next blog post, I will give more detail about specific rules you can institute to make the achievement of these goals more likely. These rules are good rules for all kinds of public conversations you might convene in the ordinary day-to-day life of teaching or leading organizations. But they are especially helpful for achieving the goals of hard conversations as we have defined them in this series.]
From start to finish—in your heart, and in your public expressions—keep seeking and valuing contrarian statements of difference and disagreement. This one might be counter-intuitive. There is a strong bias that pervades professional contexts in favor of being positive, constructive, and helpful. But if we are to successfully convene and facilitate a public conversation where the broadest number of people speak and hear the rawest, truest, most polarizing, controversial, and divisive opinions, we need to expect, accept, and normalize expressions of disagreement. Even better? We need to welcome We cannot bring divisions to light and begin a process of growth, healing, repair, and restoration unless we do. Dissent is by its nature disruptive; expressions of it always slow down the ability of the majority to get stuff done, and it always threatens to impede the ability of the majority to get everything they want. In a public conversation, we need to take special care to successfully welcome (and keep welcoming) dissenting viewpoints.As facilitator, by (a) helping to establish shared rules, norms, and values at the outset of the conversation and then (b) posing open-ended questions prompts that are designed to elicit frank feedback on targeted topics, you have tremendous power to help set the social-cultural conditions that are necessary for individuals to speak, hear, and hold disagreement about the things that matter most.It is possible—perhaps likely—that you will be trying to normalize dissent within the context of a community that, in the day-to-day order of things, does not always do a great job of seeking, hearing, and holding dissent? Whatever intended by officials in a community, or by the prevailing majority on a given issue, in practice, the expression of dissent can be impliedly vilified as an enemy of progress. Dissent upsets people. It slows things down. It frustrates decision-making. It destabilizes things. It hurts feelings. And, if we are not extra careful, dissenters can feel as if they are being vilified as enemies of progress…unless we figure out how to sincerely welcome and bless them in our circle of discourse.I think this concern for dissenters is especially important as “well-being” rhetoric becomes increasingly mainstream in law schools (and other legal environments). There are dissenters, laggards, and resisters to that movement, and—for a variety of very important reasons—they might not wish to perform mental health, positivity, or happiness in public spaces. As we try to create a “culture of well-being”, we may unwittingly coerce some into performing positivity in public spaces. These dynamics are at play whenever we try to have a hard conversation across deeply-held differences within a community of common concern.

So: what is the solution? Well, against the noble-seeming bias toward positivity and agreement, we can lead by example.

Use your power as facilitator to model the courageous, vulnerable behavior you seek to elicit. You do not need to pretend to be neutral. You can do more than strive to be positive/affirming; or, to put it another way: you can use your positivity and affirmation to welcome, endorse, and affirm dissent. Actively look for opportunities to express your own statements of dissent, difference, disagreement, criticism, objection, or resistance. Don’t be afraid to express negativity, skepticism, or pessimism about something. And, when you do, do it without apology. You can thus model the important truth: those kinds of statements are not a problem, and bringing them to light is one of the most important reasons for having this kind of conversation.
After someone expresses a criticism or a contrarian view, sincerely thank them for the comment. With curiosity, ask a follow-up question that doesn’t challenge their view (or a premise upon which it is based); instead, use your follow-up question to give the speaker an opportunity to further develop and voice that same line of thinking. With sincerity, ask questions designed to help yourself and other listeners try to better understand that dissenting point of view with more precision and detail.
As facilitator, take care to monitor and enforce the rules of conversation established by the group in unbiased ways. Those rules are in place to ensure that all speakers have the opportunity to express dissenting opinions in the clear, without being countered, corrected, interrupted, debated, disputed, or otherwise managed or controlled. You might be tempted to suspend the rules in order to “handle” or “manage” a certain kind of rogue message that threatens harm to institutional goals. Resist the urge to shut-down dangerous, disruptive comments (which can be distinguished from other kinds of harmful, violent comments that are directed towards individual persons; those kinds of comments can fairly be rebuffed without running afoul of your goal to encourage good faith dissent, criticism, disagreement, etc. in a non-personal, non-violent way).
As facilitator, you also have power to create question prompts that are designed to elicit criticism, dissent, or disagreement in indirect, less burdensome ways for your listeners and speakers.For example: you could invite speakers to imagine themselves as having absolute power to take action and fix something in the community—and then ask them to describe the change they would make, and why. Like this:If you had absolute, unilateral, god-like power to take action and change one thing about the way this law school handles [insert controversial topic that you hope to learn about]—what would it be? Why is making that change so important to you? How do you imagine the law school community would be better after you made that change? What would it look like?Notice: by identifying the thing that most needs to change, you are likely to find out about something that angers/frustrates/demoralizes the speaker, something the speaker wants to change. And you are able to discover the speaker’s preferred solution to the problem, including their reason for the solution. And you will help everyone catch a glimpse of the way the reformed world would look like, from the speaker’s perspective, once that thing the speaker wants to change gets fixed.In my experience, this question can elicit some surprising, thoughtful, deeply-felt responses. This kind of question can be applied to many different topics, and refined so that it is posed in a broad or narrow way.There are many other ways to directly or indirectly ask questions that can get people talking about things that, if not actively sought-out, would just remain hidden. Have courage! Get creative. See if you can find an easier way for someone to bring something they might ordinarily keep hidden to light.

End with silence. When I facilitate, I like to close a hard conversation by leading everyone in a minute or two of silence. It creates a sense of ritual. It creates an ending. It gives space for everyone’s brain to transition away from the rigor of dialogue to whatever comes next. It also reinforces the value of slowness, which has permeated every aspect of the conversation circle.Sometimes, I make the silence symbolic. For example: I might tell everyone that we are going to observe the silence as a way of bringing our collective attention to the reality that, for all that has been shared today, there remains a number of true and meaningful things that have yet to be articulated. Silence helps us hold those mysteries in our collective consciousness.Or: I might invite everyone to sit together for two minutes in silence to show that, despite all of the differences expressed today, the silence we share is still big enough to hold us together in unity—despite whatever differences or disagreements we voiced and heard.Or: I might say that we will observe the silence by filling it with thoughts of gratitude for contributions made—by showing up, by speaking, by hearing, by caring.Or: I might say that we are observing the silence as a way of respecting the mystery of human existence. Like the ties that bind a community, the silence between us is fragile. And, like silence, the gift of community can be easily, thoughtlessly broken if we do not take care, give our attention to it, and hold it in our concern.Or: I might say nothing. I just invite people to sit silently together for a minute (or two). And leave it to each individual to figure out how to live in their minds during that period.

We need to normalize silence as an important part of public conversations. Silence gives time to think, breathe, reflect, pray, seethe, ruminate, calm yourself, meditate, daydream, whatever. If we let it? It can speak to us. It can draw us into an experience of transcendence or mystery. It can be symbolic of the unknown, unspeakable, yet-undiscovered truths that help to define a community as surely as voiced commitments or grievances do. Silence is not something to fear, avoid, manage, or fill with noise. It is a blessing—part of what just-is—and it ought to be welcomed, with purpose, into our conversations. No shame or apology necessary.

So there you have it: six simple tips for facilitating public conversations that are explicitly designed to bring deeply personal, possibly-controversial opinions to light. Whenever I am privileged to facilitate conversations like these, my deepest hope is that every attendee will be able to head for the exit thinking something like: “I appreciate that I finally had the opportunity to speak from my heart. And I appreciate the opportunity to hear others speak from theirs.” I also hope they will be able to leave the circle saying something like, “Well, no one can accuse that of being an echo chamber!”

All of this might be exhausting, but it is nowhere near exhaustive of all that might yet be done. If you have any ideas, thoughts, concerns, or wisdom that you would like to share on the topic of facilitating hard conversations, please do not hesitate to email me at ccorts@richmond.edu. I would love to hear from you!

Christopher Corts, Contributor

October 11, 2022 by hami3258

Celebrating October 10, 2022: Mental Health Day, Indigenous People’s Day, and Professional Identity

By: Janet Stearns, Dean of Students, University of Miami School of Law
Chair, ABA COLAP Law School Committee

World Mental Health Day

October 10 has been declared as World Mental Health Day by the World Health OrganizationThe objective is to “raise awareness of mental health issues around the world and to mobilize efforts in support of mental health.” Just last week, the CDC announced that the suicide rates in the United States increased four percent from 2020 to 2021, showing that the demand for resources and education remains great.

For many years, the ABA Law Student Division and the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs have partnered to bring Mental Health Day to our law students nationwide. While initially organized in March, the groups now celebrate October 10 as Law Student Mental Health Awareness. The ABA will partner to feature national programming to bring attention to law student mental health and reduce stigma so that resources are accessed. Many law schools will use Mental Health Day as a linchpin for law school wellness days or wellness weeks. Often, lawyer assistance programs around the country also use this opportunity to visit area law schools or do outreach through social media. I expect that many of the readers of this article are already on the path to organizing programming for the upcoming Mental Health Day. However, an excellent review of the range of opportunities is covered by Jordana Alter Confino in her 2019 article Where Are We on the Path to Law Student Well-Being?: Report on the COLAP Law School Assistance Committee Law School Wellness Survey.

The 2022 Mental Health Day is just around the corner. This year, at the request of the ABA Law Student Division leadership, we have recruited a group of thought leaders on well-being (among them bar leaders, law faculty, COLAP members, and law students) to record short videos sharing messages on well-being. An intensive social media campaign will continue over the next two weeks. In addition, on Friday, October 14, a number of law students, representing diverse initiatives around mental health, well-being, and mindfulness, will convene to discuss a number of topics in law schools and advocate for change. (Please contact the author for additional information if you have students who should be added to this invitation.) We anticipate that many law schools will be hosting their own programming, and encourage all to share your activities using #LawStudentWellBeing.

While this initiative predates the recent revisions to the ABA Standards, this is an opportunity to underscore that the ABA COLAP and Law Student Division advocated jointly for the inclusion of well-being in the Standards for many years. This year, now that ALL law schools must make resources available around well-being under Section 508, we expect that 2022 Mental Health Day will truly be a national event.

Indigenous People’s Day

Monday, October 10 coincides with the holiday now known as Indigenous People’s Day. Some history on this holiday: in 1934, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt first designated October 12 as Columbus Day, commemorating the day when presumably a crew member of the ship lead by Columbus “sighted land.” Since 1971, this was recognized as a federal holiday, and then moved “officially” to the second Monday in October.

South Dakota was the first state to recognize Indigenous People’s Day in 1990, and since then a number of states have followed. While it is not yet a federal holiday, a movement is growing. In 2021, President Biden was the first U.S. President to issue a proclamation in recognition of Indigenous People’s Day.

On Indigenous Peoples’ Day, our Nation celebrates the invaluable contributions and resilience of Indigenous peoples, recognizes their inherent sovereignty, and commits to honoring the Federal Government’s trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations….On Indigenous Peoples’ Day, we honor America’s first inhabitants and the Tribal Nations that continue to thrive today.

Early in the planning for this year’s Mental Health Day, the organizers recognized that the coinciding of the two holidays provided a great opportunity for reflection and awareness. For one, we recognized that some law schools may be closed on Monday, October 10 and that we needed to be flexible with programming that would extend over the entire week. Further, in recruiting thought leaders for this year’s videos, we actively sought voices that would help us highlight the significance of the two overlapping dates. We invite you to pay particular attention to the contributions of Professor Rhonda Magee (University of San Francisco), and Siena Kalina, 3L at Colorado/ Boulder and President of the National Native American Law Students Association. We are grateful for their contributions.

The Intersection of Mental Health Day and Indigenous People’s Day: Lessons for Professional Identity Education

The significant changes in the ABA Standards in 2022 have created many opportunities in legal education. Among these is the opportunity to create new dialogue between the advocates for law student well-being and supporters of education addressing bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism. These two issues are closely intertwined on many levels, and we have a unique opportunity in the upcoming weeks to reflect and message on this.

In 2020, Mental Health Day featured the path-breaking work of Rhonda Magee and her book The Inner Work of Racial Justice: Healing Ourselves and Transforming Our Communities Through Mindfulness. The recording of her presentation is still available on the ABA website. Professor Magee’s powerful work speaks to the role of mindfulness in our own lives and as an integral part of racial justice work.

In recent years, I have also become more attuned to the need for programming that speak directly to some of our students who may feel marginalized in our law schools. I wrote about this in the AALS Student Services Section Newsletter last year, exploring the integration of well-being and anti-racism programming.

As I have been pondering for myself the upcoming holidays, let me suggest a few very concrete but important steps towards well-being for our Native American Law Students:

Miami University and other institutions are using land acknowledgements to reframe our understanding of property and show respect for local indigenous peoples. My institution now has such a land acknowledgement on its Consider special messaging that should be shared for Indigenous People’s Day.
Read about the National Native American Law Students Association and whether your law school does or should have representation.
Reach out to graduates who may be able to teach and share wisdom…with us and with our students. I made such a call last week to a wonderful former student, Curtis Osceola, who now works as Chief of Staff to the Miccosukee Indian Tribe here in
South Florida. I have asked him to write a short message to be shared with Miami Law next week in recognition of Indigenous People’s Day. You can read his powerful message, which appears at the end of this post.

Janet Stearns is Dean of Students at the University of Miami School of Law and Chair of the ABA COLAP Law School Committee.
Recognize that all of the Mental Health and Well-Being challenges that we are highlighting are playing out in significant ways in the Indigenous community, and often with far fewer resources to support.

The author welcomes hearing from colleagues across the country as we all explore approaches to our commemoration of the dual holidays that will take place October 10, 2022. You can reach me at jstearns@law.miami.edu.

Curtis Osceola’s Reflection Re: Indigenous People’s Day

Columbus Day. I remember when I was a child sitting in an elementary school classroom and being told of the exploits of Columbus. How he traveled the world, explored the Caribbean, discovered America…

I raised my hand, “Miss, Columbus didn’t discover America, my people were here.” The teacher was taken aback. I doubt anyone had ever challenged the lesson plan, “Yes he did, Curtis. Columbus discovered America.” She replied. “No, he didn’t, he was lost and my people were here first.” I was sent to the office for insubordination. I felt humiliated, guilty, and stupid. How could I have been so wrong? Is my entire existence wrong? What can I do to be “right?”

Many Natives have expressed the same defiance to colonial history, but now that defiance has become a movement. The movement to change Columbus Day to Indigenous People’s Day was born out of the rejection of the lie that is the “Discovery” story of Columbus. But why such a strong rejection? America is great after all. We have the blessings of freedom and democracy. We are protected by laws and those who enforce those laws. We have courts and modern notions of substantive and procedural due process. So why fight the history?

Because the lie hurts. Not like a cut with a knife or a bullet through the flesh. It hurts the mind. Take, for instance, a Native child today. How many Natives before them endured racism, oppression, violence? What effect did those experiences have on the mental health of their predecessors? On their brain chemistry? What is the net effect of that experience through their progeny? The generational trauma of war, removal, and extermination have evolved into contemporary mental health issues like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, and suicide. These are exacerbated by the social ills of poverty, unemployment, disenfranchisement, domestic violence, and constant bereavement.

Take the experience described earlier: Imagine if a young family member told their teacher about the history of their family member told their teacher about the history of their family, of their heritage. Imagine if the teacher said to that child that they were mistaken, that the history they learned from their family, your ancestors, was wrong. Imagine that child being punished for their expression of truth. And think for a moment—if that single incident was foundational for the formation of my personality and identity, then what further effect does the cumulative trauma mentioned earlier have on the mind?

This is a small window into the intersectionality between what is now Indigenous Peoples’ Day and World Mental Health Day. It is serendipitous that this year they both fall on October 10, 2022. Native Americans now celebrate the second Monday of October as one that is representative of their heritage, legacy, and identity. It seems that the healing has begun. Indigenous People have been subjugated and oppressed since the dawn of the New World. You can help make positive change for Indigenous people. It may not be easy, but it’s worth trying.

Curtis Osceola is an alum of Miami School of Law and now works as Chief of Staff to the Miccosukee Indian Tribe in South Florida.

So how can you make a difference? Make it personal. Become aware of the Indigenous people in your community. Ask them about their land, their history, their experiences. Empathize (or even sympathize) with them. We are the real legacy of the land—subject to the original sins of the American experiment. Remember that the experience of Indigenous people is not just a social experience, but a psychological one as well. Be a friend, be an advocate, be insubordinate avant-garde.

October 5, 2022 by hami3258

Jabeen Adawi

Clinical Pedagogy: Paving the Way for Professional Identity Formation

By: Jabeen Adawi, Clinical Assistant Professor of Law, Director of the Family Law Clinic, University of Pittsburgh School of Law

In response to the American Bar Association (ABA) revised accreditation standard 303(b) requiring schools to provide “substantial opportunities to the students for… (3) the development of a professional identity,” law schools around the country began to remedy a perceived gap in legal education: the formal and intentional development of a cohesive professional identity. Unlike other client-serving professions—such as medicine or social work—law schools are often critiqued as not doing enough to explicitly support the development of a cohesive professional identity for lawyers. Legal education seemed to rely heavily on the existence of the model rules of conduct and one class in legal ethics to ensure that new lawyers understood their fiduciary responsibilities as lawyers. However, all along clinical pedagogy has been equipping clinical programs to move students through identity formation. Below, I’ll explain how at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, the clinical faculty drew from well-developed tools and teaching approaches to synthesize a clinic-wide foundational orientation for clinic students that directly responds to standard 303(b).

The ABA standard states that professional identity is developed through an “intentional exploration of values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.” In analyzing the new standard, three distinct elements have emerged:

Internalizing a deep responsibility and care orientation to others, especially the client,
Developing ownership of continuous professional development towards excellence at the major competencies that clients, employers, and the legal system need, and
Well-being practices.

The goal of our foundational orientation is to equip students with common skills and perspectives they will refine during their clinical experiences. Since this is our first pre-semester orientation, we are beginning with a half-day program of three sessions followed by a lunch and a small swearing-in ceremony. The skills we focus on meet the three elements of professional identity formation but are not exclusively the only ways we support student growth in our program.

Internalizing Deep Responsibility to Others

The first element promotes the fiduciary responsibilities of lawyers to their clients and society at large. It centers on developing and nurturing a mindset prioritizing a client’s interests above a lawyer’s self-interest. It also orients a law student to the profession’s commitment to pro bono services and developing a justice system that provides equal access and eliminates bias, discrimination, and racism.

To address the first element, our orientation begins with a session on “Understanding Your Responsibility Towards Clients and Society.” Clinic allows students to navigate the demands of real-life legal practice in a setting where clients are facing numerous odds in exercising their legal rights in the current system. However, I find that students need to be grounded in lived experiences of their clients first. For many of my clinical colleagues and me, a poverty simulation is one way to further perspective taking. This simulation will be followed up with discussion questions where students are reflecting upon the choices they were required to make, what circumstances influenced those choices, and what they may have done differently with a changed piece of their identity or additional resource.

The second step in orienting the students towards care of others requires a thoughtful discussion about one’s fiduciary responsibility as counsel. This can begin with a reflective exercise about a student’s own life where they look for experiences being in the care of another or taking care of someone else. These may be life experiences of seeking medical care, customer service, babysitting, caring for a sick relative, being a parent, or a prior career. Reflecting on their own life, a discussion can follow about lawyer’s specific responsibilities and how they relate to the fiduciary responsibility we take on for clients. This discussion will be grounded in the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct, specifically the preamble. This exercise should set the tone for their identity as lawyers who are in service of others.

I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge that a one-time conversation is not sufficient to develop care orientation. After the perspective-taking exercises are introduced in orientation, students will be equipped to revisit these ideas as they move through their clinic work. Typically, clinic students carry lower caseloads than in practice, so it affords them the ability to connect on a deeper level with a client and gain empathy and understanding for a client’s unique lived experience and their actual needs. During the year, individual supervision conversations can revisit the orientation discussions and further reinforce their care towards others.

By the end of the year, students are well equipped to engage in conversations critically assessing the legal system, identifying shortcomings, and proposing solutions. For example, many clinics end the year with a seminar dedicated to reflecting upon challenges their clients faced in accessing the courts, coupled with a brainstorming session on potential solutions.[1] This allows students to connect what may be frustrating realizations about “justice” to tangible solutions, thus beginning to develop their capacity to effectuate systemic change.

Developing Major Competencies

The second element includes making students aware of major competencies that clients, employers, and the legal system need. These competencies include client-centered relational skills, problem-solving, and good judgment. The goal is not only to make students aware of these competencies, and their importance, but also to internalize ownership of their own development in these areas.

The second session in our orientation introduces the students to one core competency: client-centered lawyering. Through a thoughtful exercise called “the Rich Aunt” students begin to consider how personal values drive human decision making and students begin to reframe the role of a lawyer from just an advocate to also that of a client-centered counselor.[2] This exercise has students consider a hypothetical scenario where they are lined up to receive a substantial inheritance but have to evaluate if they want to settle for a lower amount or go to trial and potentially obtain more. The students evaluate what factors drove them to their decision, and then reflect on how personal the decision was. This is then connected to choices a client may make and the value in respecting the client’s ability to decide.

After orientation, this client-centered perspective is reinforced during deeper seminars on counseling and interviewing skills. In future years, we intend to broaden the pre-semester orientation to also cover these topics so the foundation to these core competencies is uniformly reinforced across the clinical program. Finally, during the semester or year, students will deepen these skills within a clinical methodology that is structured to engage a student in learning the why behind their choices, reflecting upon their choices, and drawing strategies to implement in their legal practice. This is often done in a non-directive supervision model that is designed to maximize their opportunities for developing into a self-reflective practitioner.[3] This supervision model is not often available in traditional internship or externship positions.

Establishing Well-Being Practices

The final element of well-being practices goes beyond teaching self-care practices but instead looks at three core needs of the being: “(1) autonomy (to feel in control of one’s own goals and behavior); (2) competence (to feel one has the needed skills, including physical and mental skills to be successful); and (3) relatedness (to experience a sense of belonging or attachment to other people).”[4] Autonomy requires a student to understand their values, be able to express those values, and hence know where they are in control of their goals and behaviors. Hence, developing one’s sense of self as a person becomes foundational to developing the other necessary identities of a lawyer.

The pre-semester orientation will target this element in a third session focused on “maintaining well-being in a live-client setting.” In this session, we will examine the two elements that make up one’s professional quality of life: compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue. Then, we will introduce a tool called the “Professional Quality of Life Survey” that allows students to self-evaluate the different aspects that affect their quality of life. The Professional Quality of Life Survey is a free tool developed and refined through years of research on what affects a helper’s ability to continue their work. The Center for Victims of Torture owns the tool and provides it free (along with incredible teaching resources) to help anyone working in a helper-oriented profession.

While the results of the survey may be very private, students will not be required to share the results with anyone but can if they choose. I’ve found that the more ways we can provide students a space to discuss boundaries and personal challenges affecting their lawyering, we can assist them in developing skills to navigate issues that are inevitably going to arise in their lives. In private supervision, if a student chooses to share the results of the survey, together we can examine their trends and explore ways to improve their holistic satisfaction. The reality is that no one ever works in a vacuum: our personal lives and experiences come with us to our jobs and influence our work more than we often realize.

Hopefully, like us at Pitt Law, many other schools can utilize the revised ABA standards to bring attention to the strengths of their clinical programs. If anything, there is a wealth of information in clinical pedagogy—it just needs to be tapped.

If you have any questions or comments in response to this post, then please feel free to email at JZA16@pitt.edu.

Jabeen Adawi is Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the Family Law Clinic at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

[1] In “Teaching The Clinic Seminar” text by Deborah Epstein, Jane Aiken, and Wallace Mlyniec (three seminal clinical instructors from the Georgetown University Law Center), Chapter 21, “Exploring Justice” offers one thoughtful example of a framework for discussing justice in a clinical seminar. Another example is in Sue Bryant and Jean Koh Peters’ online repository for clinical law teaching materials “Talking about Race”, where they provide tools for facilitating conversations around racial justice.

[2] Deborah Epstein, Jane Aiken, Wallace Mlyniec, Teaching the Clinic Seminar 56 (2014) (describing the “Rich Aunt” exercise).

[3] See David Chavkin, Clinical Methodology in Clinical Legal Education: A Textbook for Law School Clinical Programs 7 (2002); Serge A. Martinez, Why are We Doing This? Cognitive Science and Nondirective Supervision in Clinical Teaching, 26 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy 24 (2016) (discussing the non-directive supervision model).

[4] Neil Hamilton, Louis Bilionis, Revised ABA Standards 303(b) and (c) and the Formation of a Lawyer’s Professional Identity, Part 1: Understanding the New Requirements (May 2022).

October 3, 2022 by hami3258

Louis Bilionis, Neil Hamilton

Latest Article from Bilionis and Hamilton on ABA Revisions of 303(b) and (c) Published by NALP’s Professional Development Quarterly

NALP just published the third and final installment of Louis Bilionis and Neil Hamilton’s three-part series on the Standard 303 revisions. Part 1 and Part 2 appeared in the May and June 2022 editions of NALP’s PDQ, respectively.

The last article in the series, which is titled “Revised ABA Standards 303 (b) and (c) and the Formation of a Lawyer’s Professional Identity, Part 3: Cross-Cultural Competency, Equal Access, and the Elimination of Bias, Discrimination, and Racism,” can be read here.

September 28, 2022 by hami3258

Eliza Vorenberg, Suzanne Harrington-Steppen

Law School Pro Bono Programs: Opportunities To Reflect On What It Means To Be A Lawyer

By: Suzanne Harrington-Steppen, Associate Director of Pro Bono Programs and Clinical Professor of Law, Roger Williams University School of Law

Eliza Vorenberg, Director of Pro Bono Programs and Community Partnerships and Clinical Professor of Law, Roger Williams University School of Law

Law school pro bono programs, whether mandatory or voluntary, offer rich opportunities for students to develop their professional identities as lawyers. Roger Williams University School of Law (RWU Law) has a mandatory 50-hour Pro Bono Experiential Learning requirement. The requirement falls under our “public service” learning outcome and reflects our commitment to teaching our law students about the legal profession’s responsibility: (1) to improve access to the legal system and the quality of justice; and (2) to provide pro bono legal service in law practice to those who cannot afford legal services.

For many law students, pro bono experiences are their first opportunity to play the role of lawyer and reflect on what they are seeing in the profession and how it feels to be a part of the profession. About 40% of our first-year law students engage in a pro bono experience before they finish their first year. But, as we know, experience alone isn’t enough to help students integrate and reflect on the values and norms of the profession as they relate to public service. Law schools are uniquely situated to help students develop their professional identities by providing critical context for their pro bono service. Law schools can both teach students how pro bono service is central to the profession and also provide them with space to reflect on and process their pro bono experiences in relation to how they see themselves as future members of the profession.

Setting the Stage: Access to and Quality of Justice

Last year, when introducing our law school’s pro bono requirement and programmatic opportunities to first-year law students, we moved away from the traditional “information session” format to a session focused on educating and encouraging law students to think critically about what it means to be a lawyer and how public service and pro bono fit into their future responsibilities and the profession’s values.

We began our session asking our 1Ls to remember the following critically important questions throughout their law school experience, in and outside of the classroom, and throughout their careers:

Who has access to justice? Who doesn’t? Why or why not?

What is the quality of justice being administered? How do we evaluate the quality of justice being administered in civil versus criminal contexts?

We intentionally decided to start our session with these questions because the Preamble to the Model Rules of Professional Responsibility makes it clear that all lawyers, not just public interest lawyers or lawyers who are self-motivated to give back, have a special responsibility for ensuring access to, and the quality of, justice. Before we can teach law students about Rule 6.1 or the goals and contours of our law school’s pro bono requirement students need to be told explicitly what a lawyer’s role in society is beyond advocating for their clients. We teach our law students that grappling with these questions and then doing something to fix deficiencies in the legal system are a lawyer’s duty as a member of this profession, not some lofty dream. We also provide students with an overview of the justice gap, using the Academy for Arts & Sciences video entitled “The Civil Justice Gap”. We explain that pro bono service, as defined by Rule 6.1, is one way to take ownership of their professional responsibility to improve access to justice and the quality of justice for all but that there are many other ways they should be thinking about their role as lawyers in our society. This subtle shift in how we introduce the topic of pro bono asks law students to critique our justice system—using the access and quality framework—from the beginning of their law school journey, to identify who benefits and who is hurt by our systems of justice, and to be aware of the bias and inequities built into those systems.

Providing a Pause: Space for Reflection

Externship pedagogy, particularly its emphasis on structured reflection, can be very helpful in thinking about how law schools can design and structure their pro bono programs to promote professional identity formation opportunities. Pro bono experiences with reflective components offer meaningful opportunities for students to process and think deeply about what they are seeing, experiencing, and feeling while engaged in pro bono service and to connect it to their personal identities and lived experiences.

At RWU Law, each law student must submit a one-page written reflection in response to specific prompts after they have completed a pro bono experience they plan to use to meet our graduation requirement. In the past, we have provided prompts to students focused on the type of pro bono/public service experience, e.g., a prompt regarding working directly with clients, or for judicial experiences, the student’s observations regarding access to justice in the courts. This year, with the changes to Standard 303 in mind, we revised our pro bono reflection prompts to directly engage law students in a reflection focused on how the law student’s pro bono experience fits into their professional identity development.

In addition to requiring a written reflection, we intentionally funnel our first-year law students into pro bono opportunities that the law school has developed, facilitates, and oversees, e.g., Alternative Spring Break, Street Law, Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA), and an Eviction Help Desk. This allows us to facilitate in-person reflective meetings throughout the experience and provide more structure than simply matching the law student with an external community partner. Many law schools may not have the resources to have faculty or staff facilitating in-person reflective meetings but at a minimum law schools should consider asking for or requiring a written reflection as a way students can intentionally think about their professional development.

Whether voluntary or mandatory, law school pro bono programming is an excellent vehicle for facilitating law students’ professional identity formation consistent with the revisions to ABA Standard 303(b).

Suzanne Harrington-Steppen is the Associate Director of Pro Bono Programs and Clinical Professor of Law at Roger Williams University School of Law.

Eliza Vorenberg is the Director of Pro Bono Programs and Community Partnerships, and is Clinical Professor of Law at Roger Williams University School of Law.

If you have any questions or comments in response to this post, then please feel free to email either or both of us at sharrington-steppen@rwu.edu and evorenberg@rwu.edu.

September 26, 2022 by hami3258

Karen Tokarz

Mandatory 1L Negotiation Class and Upper-Class Dispute Resolution Courses Address Professional Identity, Bias, and Cross-Cultural Competency

By: Karen Tokarz, Charles Nagel Professor of Public Interest Law & Policy, Director of the Negotiation & Dispute Resolution Programs, and Director of the Civil Rights & Mediation Clinic, Washington University School of Law

Washington University Law School is striving to address the revised ABA Standards of 303(b) and 303(c) in multiple ways. The law school utilizes a short course on Negotiation, which we have required for 1Ls for over a decade. It is offered each year in August and January. As set forth in the syllabus, one of the four days focuses on professional identity, bias, and cross-cultural competency. This course offers a unique way of introducing 1L students to these issues via education, experiential learning, negotiation partner feedback, and self-reflection.

In addition, all of our upper-class dispute resolution courses explicitly address professional identity, bias, and cross-cultural competency, especially Cross-Cultural Dispute Resolution, which is offered both semesters.

Below are links to the syllabi of the Negotiation course and Cross-Cultural Dispute Resolution, followed by the text of each syllabi.

1L Negotiation Class Syllabus

Cross-Cultural Dispute Resolution Syllabus

Washington University School of Law Required 1L Negotiation Course (1cr.)
Class Schedule, Objectives, Learning Outcomes, and Assignments
All times are approximate

Course Objectives/Learning Outcomes:

Negotiation is the most commonly used form of legal dispute resolution in the United States and around the world. This required course is designed to introduce students to the basics of negotiation through reading, discussion, simulation exercises, and videos. The course focuses on negotiation theory, negotiation skills, lawyer (agent)/client (principal) dynamics, negotiating in teams, and negotiation ethics.

The ability to participate successfully in legal negotiations rests on a combination of five core skills that students will begin to develop in this course: 1) theoretical understanding; 2) interpersonal and intrapersonal awareness; 3) planning; 4) drafting; and 5) reflection. This course provides students with a set of conceptual frameworks and practice experiences that will enhance understanding and skill level in these areas, from the various perspectives of negotiators, advocates, and clients in negotiations.

This introductory course lays the foundation for learning in upper-level negotiation and dispute resolution courses, as well as doctrinal courses. The course introduces issues of leadership, professional identity, bias, cross-cultural competency and cross-cultural humility. The course also helps prepare students for negotiation and dispute resolution issues soon to be added to the multi-state bar exam.

Course Requirements:

Attendance will be taken at the beginning of each class Because this is a short, one-credit class, anyone who is not present for all four days will not earn credit for the class and will be required to retake it at another time.
There is no final examination for this course, but there is required reading and four required short Students may discuss the assignments with each other but must draft the assignments individually. Students are urged to use their own words in response to the questions. Students are not required to footnote references to the assigned books, other than an initial reference, unless using direct quotations. Students must submit each of their four papers via Canvas before the beginning of each class and receive a passing mark on each paper to pass the course. Students who fail to submit passing papers before the beginning of each class will not earn credit for the course and will be required to retake it at another time.

In addition to the four required papers, there are other short assignments, including a Negotiation Self-Analysis & Partner Feedback Form following each Students must submit passing papers related to the negotiations by the conclusion of each class to pass the course.

ABA Standard 310:

Texts:

Students must read Roger Fisher & William Ury, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (any edition) before beginning the course. Assigned readings in addition to Getting to Yes will be available on the course Canvas page. Students are strongly encouraged to read the additional readings before beginning the course. Each day’s module on Canvas will include assigned readings and relevant handouts and links.

Tuesday August 23: Negotiation Theories, Strategies, and Styles

Class Schedule:

1:00-2:00         Introduction to the Course and Overview of Day
2:00-2:35         First Negotiation Exercise: The Gallery
2:35-2:45         Share Reflections with Other Side
2:45-2:55         Break
2:55-3:30         Analysis of First Exercise
3:30-4:30         Discussion of Getting to Yes and Theories of Negotiation

Assignment: Please read the entirety of Roger Fisher & William Ury, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (any edition). Please come to class prepared to discuss the reading and to pose two comments or questions.

To be eligible for credit for the course, students must submit before the beginning of class via Canvas a Pre-Negotiation Course Profile, along with a written memo of minimum four (4) pages, maximum five (5) pages, that addresses the questions below. Please use 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1.5 spacing. In your memo, please answer the following questions:

What are the downsides of bargaining solely over positions in a negotiation? Why and how could one shift the focus from positions to underlying interests in a negotiation?
Compare distributive bargaining to problem-solving negotiation. Can lawyers change adversarial bargaining to problem-solving in disputes and deals without risking exploitation? What comparative benefits do you think lawyers bring to negotiations?
Identify various kinds of interpersonal and intrapersonal people problems that might occur in a negotiation. Why and how could one separate people from the problem in a negotiation? Why and how could one invent and use options for mutual gain in a negotiation? What are possible obstacles to inventing and using these options?
Why and how could one develop and use objective criteria in a negotiation? Why and how could one develop and use their and the other side’s BATNA?
What is the definition of a successful negotiation?
What do you see as the biggest pro and the biggest con of the approach suggested in Getting to Yes.

Wednesday, August 24: Lawyer (Agent)/Client (Principal) Relationships, Professional Identity, Confidentiality, Negotiation Ethics

Class Schedule:

1:00-2:10         Discussion of Readings and Overview of Day
2:10-2:30         Prepare for Second Negotiation Exercise (with same party)
2:35-2:45         Break
2:45-3:30         Second Negotiation Exercise: Client Interview/Retainer Agreement
3:30-3:40         Share Reflections with Other Side
3:40-4:30         Analysis of Second Exercise

Assignment: Please read the Model Rules of Professional Conduct (focus on the Preamble and Rules 1, 4, and 8); read pp. 95-138 in Art Hinshaw & Jess K. Albert, Doing the Right Thing: An Empirical Study of Attorney Negotiation Ethics; and read Beyond Words (and complete the short listening test at the end of that article).

Please come to class prepared to discuss the readings and to pose two comments or questions. To be eligible for credit for the course, students must submit before the beginning of class via Canvas a completed listening test (located at the end of the Beyond Words article), plus a written memo of minimum three (3) pages, maximum four (4) pages, that addresses the below questions. Please use 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1.5 spacing. In your memo, please answer the following questions:

What are potential professional and ethical dilemmas for lawyers (agents) when engaged in negotiations on behalf of clients (principals)?
Why do you think lawyers violate rules such as Model Rules 1, 4, or 8?
Can lawyers and/or clients lie in negotiations? What are the risks, rewards?
What is the role of confidentiality in legal negotiations?
What does it mean for a lawyer to listen beyond the words? What does it mean to lawyer “with” your client, rather than “for” your client? What is client-centered lawyering?

Thursday, August 25: Bias, Cultural Competence, Cultural Humility

Class Schedule:

1:00-1:40         Discussion of Readings and Overview of Day
1:40-2:00         Prepare for Third Negotiation Exercise (with partner)
2:00-2:40       Third Negotiation Exercise: Sally Soprano
2:40-2:50       Share Reflections
2:50-3:00        Break
3:00-4:00       Analysis of Third Exercise
4:00-4:30         Joint Planning for Fourth Exercise (with same party)

Assignment: Please read Sue Bryant and Jean Koh Peters, Five Habits for Cross-Cultural Lawyering.

Please come to class prepared to discuss the readings and to pose two comments or questions. To be eligible for credit for the course, students must submit before the beginning of class via Canvas a written memo of minimum two (2) pages, maximum three (3) pages, that addresses the below questions. Please use 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1.5 spacing. In your memo, please answer the following questions:

In what ways might bias and culture influence lawyering with clients and others, and what potential issues might arise for you in client interactions and negotiations?
What are your biggest insights/take-a-ways as to each of the five habits for cross-cultural lawyering that you might use to help identify your biases and cultural norms, and those of your clients and others, to enhance your communications and negotiations?

Friday, August 26: The Art of Persuasion

Class Schedule:

1:00-1:40         Discussion of Video and Overview of Day
1:40-1:50 Prepare for Fourth Exercise (with partner)
1:50-3:00 Fourth Exercise: Multi-Party Negotiation
3:00-3:10 Share Reflections
3:10-3:20     Break
3:20-4:30    Analysis of Fourth Exercise, Concluding Lecture, Next Steps to Improve as a Negotiator

Assignment: Please watch the first 17 minutes of Mr. Rogers and the Power of Persuasion , http://www.youtube.com/watch?y=_DGdDQrXy5U (link also available on Canvas), and read Carmine Gallo, The Art of Persuasion Hasn’t Changed in 2,000 Years, available at www.carminegallo.com/the-art-of-persuasion-hasnt-changed-in-2000-years/ Please come to class prepared to discuss the video and reading, and to pose two comments or questions as to how the art of persuasion is relevant to negotiations and dispute resolution.

To be eligible for credit for the course, students must submit before the beginning of class via Canvas a written negotiation plan of minimum two (2) pages, maximum three (3) pages. Please use 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1.5 spacing. In your negotiation plan, please include four columns, one each for you and your partner and one each for the other side and her/his partner. Identify what you understand/guesstimate each side wants (substantive and relationship goals/ positions), why (underlying interests), how (optimal negotiation styles), cultural/ethical issues, options for achieving mutual gains as to substantive and relationship goals, information you want to obtain/retain, aspiration points, resistance points (bottom lines), and BATNAs.

Cross-Cultural Dispute Resolution Fall, 2022
Mondays, 9:00 AM – 10:52 AM Anheuser-Busch Hall, Room

Prof. Juan Del Valle juandelvalle@wustl.edu

SYLLABUS

CREDITS: 3.0

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Disputes and dispute resolution frequently involve cross-cultural conflict. Effective dispute resolution methods involve additional elements than those used in intra-culture adjudicatory and amicable dispute resolution processes. Through a harmonic integration of legal, sociological, psychological, and neurological concepts and findings, this course is designed to equip students with valuable tools that will allow them to choose suitable dispute resolution methods and strategies for resolving cross-cultural controversies, and managing legal conflicts involving individuals from diverse cultures and backgrounds, including but not limited to gender, religion, national origin, and race. The course is designed to enhance negotiation and dispute resolution skills by increasing cultural intelligence (CQ) for legal professionals who will be involved in diverse conflict resolution scenarios, whether as attorneys, negotiators, facilitators, or adjudicators. The course includes assigned readings, drafting, and simulations related to cross-cultural dispute resolution.

ABA STANDARD COMPLIANCE

ABA Standard 310 requires “not less than one hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction and two hours of out-of-class student work per week or the equivalent amount of work over a different amount of time” for each credit hour awarded. This course has been designed to meet this requirement, through the inclusion of mandatory readings, free research and assignments that will be explained during the course and a final essay, expecting each student to spend at least two hours of out-of-class time for each one hour of in-class-time per credit hour.

COURSE OBJECTIVES AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of the semester, students will be able to effectively:

Recognize and utilize techniques to communicate and collaborate with cross-cultural stakeholders about their cases, the law, and policy in negotiations and mediation processes;
Recognize and understand the existence of biases and their impact in information-collecting processes;
Acknowledge ways to control biases and other informational barriers sourced in the adaptive unconscious;
Recognize and understand the impact of context and the distribution of power in negotiations and mediations, including culture, gender, race, national origin, religion;

Identify and understand the underlying interests of all of the stakeholders in dispute resolution processes where cultural difference may add challenges to the collection of information;
Recognize and understand opportunities for and barriers for stakeholders to create and claim value on a sustainable basis in dispute resolution processes.
Recognize and understand the impact of intrapersonal and interpersonal styles, and persuasion techniques in negotiations and mediations involving cross-cultural interactions;
Identify and utilize necessary oral and written advocacy skills with and on behalf of stake- holders in negotiations and mediations involving cross-cultural interactions;
Enhance communication, relationship development, trust building, and persuasion skills in negotiations and mediations involving cross-cultural interactions;
Enhance collaboration skills and maximize effectiveness working as a team member to advance the interests of the stakeholders and the process in negotiations and mediations involving cross-cultural interactions;

ASSESSMENT AND GRADING

Students are expected to prepare for every class. Participation in class discussions and class exercises, including a final project will be highly graded and will be assigned twenty-five percent (25%) of the final grade. A final, anonymous essay of approximately 6 pages will have a seventy five percent (75%) weight on the grade.

READINGS AND EXERCISES

Students must read and prepare for a discussion of the assigned readings prior to each session and come to class prepared to actively participate in class discussions. Students are encouraged to read any additional material they find useful to complement lectures. The instructors may suggest complementary readings during the course.

ATTENDANCE POLICY

This is a participatory course. Its success depends on everyone’s active participation and preparation for the exercises that are assigned. Students are allowed to miss 2 classes without that absence negatively impacting their grade; provided that, (i) I am notified in advance of your expected absence (preferably at the previous class) and (ii) any materials you are required to turn in are delivered to me before the class you will miss. Failure to provide advanced notice of an absence, turn in any assignments prior to class or missing more than two classes (absent extreme circumstances approved by Elizabeth Walsh, Associate Dean for Student Services) will count as an unexcused absence. We can be notified about expected absences in class or by email. Unexcused absences will negatively impact both the class participation and performance portions of your grade.

SIMULATION EXERCISES & CASE STUDIES

We will have 2-4 exercises in the course of the semester.

For the simulations to be successful and allow you to develop your skills, it is important that they are approached as seriously as you would approach a real-life negotiation. It is also important that you maintain your assigned role, try to maximize the outcome of the party you are assigned and fully prepare for each simulation. Most of all, I want you to enjoy every single session of this course.

LAPTOP POLICY

Laptops may be used during class discussions to take notes and used during simulations if you are instructed to do so. At no time may laptops be used to surf the web or communicate about subjects not related to the class. Cell phones shall NOT be used at any time while class is in session to make calls, take in-coming calls, or text, except during class breaks. Use of laptops, cell phones, or other electronic devices during class at prohibited times is extremely distracting and reflects a lack of respect to your classmates and me and will result in a failing participation grade for that class session.

CLASS PARTICIPATION

Your final grade will be a combination of the following:
Weekly Class Attendance, Class Participation, and Final Project (25%)

Weekly Participation:

Your weekly class participation throughout the semester, as demonstrated through preparation and discussion of the assigned reading materials, active engagement in the simulations, and negotiation planning memos will be worth 25% of your grade.

Final Essay:

75% of your grade.

*Required Course Textbooks

Fisher, R., Ury, W. (2011). Getting to Yes: Reaching Agreements Without Giving In. New York, NY: Penguin Books. ISBN-10: 0143118757; ISBN-13: 978-0143118756.

Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group. ISBN-10: 9781473684829; ISBN-13: 978-1473684829.

Randolph, P. (2016). The Psychology of Conflict: Mediating in a Diverse World. Bloomsbury Continuum. ISBN-10: 1472922972; ISBN-13: 978-1472922977.

*Required Additional Readings

Cairns, D. (2005). Mediating International Commercial Disputes: Differences in U.S. and Euro- pean Approaches. Dispute Resolution Journal. Aug-Oct, 2005; 60, 3. Available at http://www.nysba.org/workarea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=67718

Pair, Lara M. (2002). Cross-Cultural Arbitration: Do the Differences Between Cultures Still In- fluence International Commercial Arbitration despite Harmonization? ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law. Vol 9, Issue 1, Article 2. Available at https://nsuworks.nova.edu/il- sajournal/vol9/iss1/2/

*Suggested Complementary Readings

Groves, K., Feyerherm, A., Minhua, G. (2015). Examining Cultural Intelligence and Cross-Cul- tural Negotiation Effectiveness. Journal of Management Education, Vol. 39(2) 209-243. Available at www.sagepub.com.

Class Schedule and Assigned Mandatory Readings

Week 1: Basics of Legal Negotiation and Dispute Resolution

Readings: Fisher, R., Ury, W. (2011) Getting to Yes. Chapters I – IV.

Week 2: The Psychology of Conflict in Legal Dispute Resolution: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Existentialism, Psychological Perceptions in Conflicts, and the Impact of Emotions

Readings: Randolph, P. (2016). The Psychology of Conflict: Mediating in a Diverse World. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Chapters 1, 2, 3.

Week 3: The Psychology of Conflict in Legal Dispute Resolution: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Self-Esteem, Values and Polarities, Interpersonal Relationships, and Psychological Impact of Listening.

Readings: Randolph, P. (2016). The Psychology of Conflict: Mediating in a Diverse World. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Chapters 4, 5, 6.

Week 4: The Psychology of Conflict in Legal Dispute Resolution: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Assumptions and Biases, Amicable Dispute Resolution, Differing Models of Negotiations and Mediations, Empathy, and Neurology of Conflict Resolution.

Readings: Randolph, P. (2016). The Psychology of Conflict: Mediating in a Diverse World. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Chapters 7, 8, 9.

Week 5: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Language Differences

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 1.

Week 6: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Cultural Conditioning

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 2.

Week 7, October 10: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Culture Categorization, Culture Relativism v. Constructivism, and Integration

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 3.

In-Class Activity Links: Video: Richard Evanoff. (2016). How can People from Different Cultures get Along with Each Other? TedX on Youtube.com. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osZr7DLxs8A

Week 8: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Time in Cross-Cultural Negotiations

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 4.

Week 9: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Power- less Communication, Power of Paraphrasing and Reframing, and Communication Gaps

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 5.

Week 10: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Motivation and Trust-Building, and the Low-Trust Syndrome

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 9.

Week 11: Overcoming Cross-Cultural Barriers in Legal Dispute Resolution: Meeting of the Minds, Relationship-Building, Giving-In as a Strategy to Overcome Low Trust and Ot- her Cross-Cultural Barriers

Readings: Lewis, R. (2018). When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston, MA: Hachette Book Group, Chapter 10.

In-Class Activity Links: Link: Rathi, A. (2015). This Simple Negotiation Tactic Brought 195 Countries to Consensus. Retrieved from https://qz.com/572623/this-simple-negotiation-tactic- brought-195-countries-to-consensus-in-the-paris-climate-talks/.

Week 12: Gender, Race, National Origin, and Religion in Dispute Resolution

Preparation for class: Please research on recent studies regarding the influence of race, gender, and religion in dispute resolution processes. Please be prepared to share your findings in class.

Readings: Pair, Lara M. (2002). Cross-Cultural Arbitration: Do the Differences between Cultures Still Influence International Commercial Arbitration Despite Harmonization? ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law. Vol 9, Issue 1, Article 2. Cairns, D. (2005).

Week 13: Cross-Cultural Views of Commercial Dispute Resolution
Readings: Mediating International Commercial Disputes: Differences in U.S. and European Approaches. Dispute Resolution Journal. Aug-Oct 2005; 60, 3.

Cross-Cultural Arbitration: Do the Differences between Cultures Still Influence International Commercial Arbitration Despite Harmonization? ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law. Vol 9, Issue 1, Article 2. Cairns, D. (2005).

Week 14: Giving, transparency, and building trust in Cross-cultural dispute resolution processes.

In-class activity: Final project presentation and discussion.

If you have any questions or comments about the courses, then please feel free to email me at tokarz@wustl.edu.

Karen Tokarz is the Charles Nagel Professor of Public Interest Law & Policy, Director of the Negotiation & Dispute Resolution Programs, and Director of the Civil Rights & Mediation Clinic at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis.

September 19, 2022 by hami3258

Megan Bess

Transitions, Professional Identity Formation, and the Significance of Summer after 1L Year

By: Megan Bess, Director of the Externship Program and Assistant Professor of Law,
University of Illinois Chicago School of Law

Law students experience significant transitions during their legal education that influence their ability to think and act as an attorney. These transitions are marked by intense learning periods in which students develop a new understanding of their profession. So why are transitions important to professional identity formation? Research from other professions, most notably the medical field, shows us that transitions are key to professional identity development and are therefore important milestones for targeting professional identity formation efforts. These transitions represent opportunities for law schools to support students and further their efforts to comply with the new ABA requirement to integrate professional identity formation into legal education.

While there is generally a dearth of studies regarding the major transitions that students experience on their path to becoming attorneys, Professor Neil Hamilton’s research provides some helpful insight into important transitions during 1L year. Hamilton surveyed students at his own law school and found that summer employment (paid or unpaid) after the first year of law school had the biggest impact on their thinking and acting like a lawyer. Thus, summer employment, particularly after the first year of law school, represents an important transition for law students. This is not entirely surprising, as studies of other professions tell us that reactions to real-world settings often represent critical turning points in developing professional identity.

The challenge is for law schools to leverage tools for professional identity formation to help students understand and capitalize on these important real-world legal experiences. As law schools plan for compliance with ABA Standard 303’s new provision requiring “substantial opportunities” for development of professional identity, they would be wise to consider the importance of major transitions to this process. As Professor Louis Bilionis makes clear, experiences important to professional identity, such as summer employment, take place while a student is in law school but fall outside traditional law school oversight. To fully support professional identity formation during summer employment, legal educators must take a broader view of their responsibilities for all formative experiences during law school.

The good news is that legal education is already equipped with pedagogical tools to support student professional identity during transitions that take place while they are working. Externship pedagogy is designed to support the professional identity formation that takes place during real lawyering work. Common externship tools, such as orientation/training, goal setting, reflection, and feedback, aid in the formation of professional identity. Externship programs differ in structure and can be adapted to the needs of individual schools and curricula. Under ABA Standard 304, every externship program must provide students with opportunities to perform legal work, engage in self-evaluation, receive feedback, and be guided in reflection on the experience. This means that no matter the structure of a school’s externship program, many recommended practices for professional identity formation are already in place.

Schools can leverage their existing externship programs to provide professional identity formation opportunities for all students during the significant transition that occurs while working during the summer after 1L year. Each law school can customize a summer support program with a structure and pedagogy to meet their school’s needs. Ideally, these programs would feature some common effective pedagogical tools. For example, providing an orientation or training program before students begin their summer positions could help frame their experiences and facilitate goal setting that takes into account their own strengths and weaknesses. Reflection is critical for professional identity formation—ideally students would have opportunities to reflect periodically on their experiences and then summarily at summer’s conclusion. Students also need feedback and would greatly benefit from school support in interpreting that feedback while engaging in self-reflection on their performance.

Some notable challenges to this approach include whether to offer academic credit, incentivizing student participation, enlisting faculty and staff support, and engaging employers. In a forthcoming article for the Clinical Law Review, I explore these challenges and offer additional suggestions for such a program following 1L year. In this piece, I propose creating a credit-earning course offered during the summer after 1L year to incentivize participation and underscore the seriousness of the professional identity formation process. There are, however, alternatives to this approach and any efforts that schools can take to support students during important transitions such as the summer after 1L year can reap important benefits.

Please contact me at mbess@uic.edu with comments or questions.

Megan Bess is the Director of the Externship Program and Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Illinois Chicago School of Law.

September 16, 2022 by hami3258

Kathryn Thompson

Normalizing Checking in with One Another and with Ourselves

By: Kathryn M. Thompson, Director of Academic Excellence and Teaching Professor,
Roger Williams University School of Law

Interpretation 303-5 states that “[t]he development of a professional identity should involve an intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.” Any of us who have struggled with our mental health understand that our first instinct is to isolate ourselves when the pangs of anxiety or the darkness of depression rear their heads. While society has come a long way since I first faced my own mental health challenges over twenty years ago, stigma and some shame still attach to these challenges, particularly in legal institutions where traditionally these challenges have been considered weaknesses.

Each year law school staff and faculty have an opportunity to choose what messages to prioritize in our early sessions with our incoming 1L students. I wrote this blog as I prepared for Orientation with our first-year students. We greet our 1Ls each year in mid-August. Their fresh faces, revealing equal amounts of excitement and anxiety, remind me of the vital role law schools play in our students’ well-being. So many opportunities exist at this early moment to fan their excitement and curiosity and to alleviate their anxieties as they enter their first year of law school. Accomplishing this task while also being candid about the demands of law school and its potential impact on their mental health is an important goal for law school faculty and staff each year. Every year I try to balance teaching skills like case briefing and reading with the less obvious but equally necessary concepts of growth mindset and self-care. Law students need both types of information and while I know how to teach someone how to read a case and I have a decent presentation on growth mindset, I have struggled helping my students embrace self-care in law school. I am like most lawyers who never learned about wellness in law school and was forced to do so after I suffered a depressive episode in my mid-30s. It was only then that I worked with a therapist who helped me to understand the importance of “checking in” with myself regularly regarding my own mental health and only then did I become more able to embrace wellness practices. I am still working on embracing them.

Several forces at play in the first year of law school inhibit a student’s willingness and ability to reach out for help. First, the sheer novelty of the legal casebook method of learning and the Socratic method (however modified it may be) creates a challenge to prepare for classes. Add the legalese in many casebooks and the need to learn a whole new foundational vocabulary and students are hard-pressed to manage their time particularly come October when legal writing papers and midterms first hit. The sheer pace of law school can prevent them from being aware of the impact their sleep deprivation or anxiety is having on their studies. And the shame associated with being “the only one” who isn’t thriving does not encourage wellness practices. Again, without awareness of our own mental health status and an intentional reflection on our mental health, students – and lawyers – continue riding the roller-coaster without seeking help in the early stages before crisis hits. Added to the workload is a law student’s concern (and misconception) that seeking counseling for their mental health challenges will lead to character and fitness issues when they seek to practice law. In this environment, helping students to embrace wellness practices requires an intentional effort to message to all students that the law school community values self-care and that wellness is a key component of a balanced life as a lawyer.

While the counseling center in a university (if a school is fortunate to have one), provides the expert counseling, efforts by law school staff and faculty in alliance with the student body can provide the fertile ground in which students embrace wellbeing practices such as meditation, exercise, deep breathing, therapy, and medication. There are steps that law schools can take early on in a students’ career to provide students “permission” and opportunity to incorporate wellness practices into their studies and, thus, their future legal practice. At RWU law over the past two or so years we have instituted some steps to foster our students’ awareness of their own mental health and to normalize pausing and reflecting on one’s own mental health at regular interviews throughout the course of the semester. One of these measures is called Early Alert: Proactive Check-Ins to Prevent Suicide/Violence and Promote Wellness. Through the initiative of Lorraine Lalli, Dean of Student Life and Operations, the law school partnered with Early Alert last year. Early Alert provides regular, confidential opportunities for students to pause and reflect on their wellness in various areas such as Sleep, Academics, Finances, Relationships, etc. Students who opt into the program report on their wellness on a scale of one to ten. A student who reports a score that shows the student is struggling in that area receives resources and a check-in over the next few days. Another measure the school has taken, which is more subtle but equally important is that we have intentionally prioritized wellness with our students early in the semester. During the first week of school, we bring all of our 1Ls together for a session on wellness. During this session we introduce our students to the Director of our Counseling Center who provides an overview of the counseling center’s services and also a brief explanation of the various reasons that students may seek counseling. 2L and 3L students attended that session this year to provide the message that the 1Ls have a network of support within the law school.

This year, Anna Arakelian, the President and founder of the RWU Law Mental Health Club spoke of an upcoming session the club had scheduled in September on Imposter Syndrome with Remmy Stourac, the author of “The Arsenal of Gratitude.” “Whatever you’re feeling, we felt it, too,” Anna told the 1Ls who listened intently to her and to the two Academic Excellence Teaching Fellows, 3L Nellie Large, and 2L Stefanie Fischer who came to connect with the 1Ls that day. All three upper-level students encouraged the 1Ls to use Early Alert and to be honest about how they were feeling. If the alert asked them to rate their sleep on a zero to ten scale and they had a zero, put zero. “At first I would usually put the higher number because I didn’t want to say that I wasn’t doing well, but one day I was honest and the Alert provided me with helpful resources,” Anna told the students. All upper-level students spoke of finding time (whether thirty minutes or a whole day) to take breaks from law school and how important those breaks are to their ability to thrive in law school. Each wished they had paused more often during the 1L year to provide time for maintaining some balance in their lives.

Forging human connections with our students provides opportunity for authenticity and vulnerability. If students feel free to voice their anxieties and their self-doubts, whether with another student, a staff member, or faculty member, students are much more likely to implement wellness practices as a meaningful part of their lives as students and future lawyers. As Anna said to me after the session, “We’re all humans before we become lawyers.”

Please contact me at kthompson@rwu.edu with comments or questions.

Kathryn M. Thompson serves as the Director of Academic Excellence and Teaching Professor at Roger Williams University School of Law in Rhode Island.

September 14, 2022 by hami3258

Patrick Longan

Inside the Legal Profession: Conversations with Members of Georgia Bench and Bar

Learning by Example: Conversations with Leaders in the Legal Profession that Help Guide Law Students’ Professional Identity Formation

By: Pat Longan, William Augustus Bootle Chair in Professionalism Ethics, Director of the Mercer Center for Legal Ethics and Professionalism, Mercer University School of Law

[Note: This post is adapted from the Foreword to “Inside the Legal Profession – Conversations with Leaders of the Georgia Bench and Bar,” publication forthcoming from Mercer University Press]

All first-year students at Mercer University School of Law take a three-credit course on professional identity. I created the early versions of that course, which began in 2004, and for many years I have taught it with my colleagues Daisy and Tim Floyd. In our course, the students learn that to find success and meaning in the law they need to cultivate a certain kind of professional identity, one that is infused with the traditional values of the profession. The course teaches that lawyers must be competent, faithful to clients, faithful to the law, public-spirited, and civil. It also teaches that lawyers must have the practical wisdom to find the right combination of these virtues for particular situations. To see what we do in that course in detail, take a look at the text we co-wrote, The Formation of Professional Identity: The Path from Student to Lawyer (Routledge Press 2019) and the web page we maintain about it.

Knowing that these are the virtues that lawyers need is important but not enough. Cultivating them is hard work, and there are many obstacles to their implementation in practice. We discovered early in the evolution of the course that we needed to focus not just on the transmission of knowledge but also on motivating the students. We had to show the students the rewards of all that hard work and perseverance. To do that, we needed to bring to them lawyers and judges who are exemplars of the kinds of professionals we are urging them to become.

That need led to the creation of the “Inside the Legal Profession” component of our course. On Monday and Friday mornings over the course of the semester, I interview judges and lawyers with the entire first year class as the audience. I follow the format of the famous “Inside the Actor’s Studio” interviews that James Lipton conducted for many years, and I discuss with each guest his or her life in the law, leaving time at the end for the students to ask questions. The interviews are routinely recorded. More than fifty of the interviews are posted to YouTube, where collectively they have garnered thousands of views. You can find a link to those interviews here. Mercer Law received the 2014 E. Smythe Gambrell Professionalism Award for this project.

Over the years, I have had the privilege of interviewing justices and judges from the federal trial and appellate courts; the Georgia Supreme Court; the Georgia Court of Appeals; various Superior Courts around the state; State Court judges; a Juvenile Court judge; and a Magistrate Court judge. Lawyers from every part of the profession have participated: prosecutors; defense lawyers; big firm, big city litigators and transactional specialists; solo practitioners; divorce and family law attorneys; government lawyers; law professors and administrators; in-house counsel; plaintiffs’ lawyers; insurance defense lawyers; and bar counsel. Our students have heard from members of the profession at every stage of a career, including brand-new graduates who talk about those first months of practice, to young lawyers navigating the partnership track in law firms or struggling to make successes of their own firms, all the way to senior partners and distinguished judges with the perspectives of decades in the profession. The roster of guests has been diverse by gender, race, sexual preference, and ethnicity. At Mercer, we have been honored by the generosity of all the busy and important people who have volunteered their time to help introduce our new students to the many lives in the law from which the students might choose.

This fall, Mercer University Press is publishing the transcripts of eleven of these interviews. It was difficult to choose just a handful of the interviews to include in the book, but the lawyers and judges who appear represent an excellent cross-section of our guests. Five are graduates of Mercer Law School. United States District Judge Louis Sands describes his journey from the time when he was a child and told his mother that he wanted to attend Mercer University – this at a time when no African-American child could do so – through his Mercer education, service as a prosecutor, private practitioner, and Superior Court Judge, to his nomination, confirmation, and service on the federal bench. Angie Coggins talks about what it is like to serve as a public defender, the career choice she made as an intern in Mercer Law School and that she followed for more than thirty years. Tomieka Daniel, who has participated in the series every year since its inception, gives the students a look inside the challenges and rewards of representing clients who need but cannot afford a lawyer for a civil matter and thus turn to her as a legal services attorney. Doc Schneider tells of his serendipitous choice to attend Mercer Law School and how that led to a stellar career at King & Spalding in Atlanta, including working for two other famous Mercer lawyers, former judge and attorney general Griffin Bell and legendary trial lawyer Frank Jones. Lamar Sizemore, Jr., who along with Judge Sands is a member of the famous Mercer Law class of 1974, talks about his three careers, as a highly successful plaintiffs’ lawyer, as a Superior Court judge, and as a mediator. Along the way, he imparts memorable lessons, including what he learned from the late, great Hank O’Neill about how one deals with opposing counsel who mistreat you.

Others who appear in the book have connections to the Mercer Law faculty. Professor Jim Fleissner has taught at Mercer since 1994, and the graduating classes have selected him to receive the teaching award seventeen times; he talks about his earlier career as a federal prosecutor and about how to take advantage of the opportunities that law school affords. Dean Daisy Floyd, now University Professor of Law and Ethical Formation, describes her career trajectory from being an associate at a big law firm through her appointment and service as Dean of the Mercer Law School. Along the way, she had occasion to be a client, and in her interview, she candidly describes the circumstances that led her to need a lawyer and the lessons she learned about lawyering from the experience of being a client. Justice (then Judge) Verda Colvin is an adjunct professor at Mercer; she shares the insight and wisdom of someone who has succeeded in private practice, as a state prosecutor, as a federal prosecutor, and as a judge. Her dedication to excellence, and her courage to be herself as a judge rather than mimic what other judges do, have inspired our students every time she has visited our class.

Two of the interviews in this volume are of lawyers who have no direct connection to Mercer but who nevertheless made the effort to come to Macon and speak with our students. Emmet Bondurant talks about his varied and highly successful career, as a Supreme Court advocate, founder and leader of a highly successful commercial firm in Atlanta, as an attorney for two detainees at Guantanamo Naval Base, and as the pro bono lawyer for a man wrongfully convicted of murder. He describes his motivation for some of his most high-profile pro bono work: “I hate bullies.” Former Chief Justice Harold Melton (now a partner at Troutman Pepper in Atlanta) shared with the class his experiences as the first African-American president of the student body at Auburn University; as a law student at the University of Georgia who placed at “the top of the bottom half of the class;” as a lawyer in the Georgia Attorney General’s office; as counsel to Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue; as a Justice on the Supreme Court of Georgia; and finally as Chief Justice of that Court. He speaks of the importance in his life of the mentorship of a previous Chief Justice, the late Harris Hines.

As part of their development of their professional identities, students need to see and hear from lawyers and judges who have succeeded and found success and meaning in their work. They need to have exemplars, people whose stories inspire them and whose paths they may want to follow. With the help of the people whose interviews appear in the forthcoming book, and the help of the dozens of others who have participated in the “Inside the Legal Profession” project, we have been able to do that at Mercer Law School. If you are interested in doing something similar as part of a professional identity program, or you want to create a professional identity class, then please contact me at longan_p@law.mercer.edu.

Patrick Longan
William Augustus Bootle Chair in Ethics and Professionalism in the Practice of Law, Mercer University School of Law;
Director, Mercer Center for Legal Ethics and Professionalism

September 12, 2022 by hami3258

Aric Short

Crowdsourcing Implementation Plans, Tools, and Techniques for Standard 303(b)(3)

By: Aric Short, Professor of Law and Director of the Professionalism & Leadership Program, Texas A&M University School of Law

As law schools welcome students back to campus this fall, a revised accreditation standard goes into force. Under the new Standard 303(b)(3), each law school “shall provide substantial opportunities to students for the development of a professional identity.” As explained in Interpretation 303-5, “[p]rofessional identity focuses on what it means to be a lawyer and the special obligations lawyers have to their clients and society.” Exploration of this topic should include the “values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.” Importantly, the ABA recognizes that professional identity formation is a process that takes time, experience, and reflection. As a result, students “should have frequent opportunities for such development each year of law school and in a variety of courses and co-curricular and professional development activities” (emphasis provided).

The ABA has taken a sequenced approach to implementation of this new professional identity formation requirement. In the fall of 2022, all law schools are expected to have initial plans in place to implement Standard 303. By the fall of 2023, schools are required to begin implementing their plans.

Figuring out exactly how to comply with this new ABA standard can be challenging. Embedded in that challenge are various procedural and structural questions. What process will your school use to evaluate existing professional identity formation efforts? Who will be in charge of ensuring compliance? Which law school stakeholders will be involved in that process? Will professional identity formation be introduced during Orientation? If so, how and by whom? Will 1L students take a course on professional identity formation or be required to attend a series of workshops? Or will similar themes be introduced in classes across the 1L curriculum? Similarly, how will each school continue to expose students to professional identity formation themes throughout the remainder of their law school experience—including in experiential courses and in interactions with offices supporting career services and academic support? Beyond these and other mechanical issues, there exist significant questions about content. What exactly does professional identity formation mean to your institution? What are the core themes you want to emphasize and reinforce with your students? And how will those themes be staggered and built upon so that students develop a deeper sense of their own professional identities as they move through law school?

To assist law schools as they work through these and other issues related to Standard 303(b)(3) implementation, the Holloran Center is announcing two new crowdsourced and collaborative resources. You and your school are invited to contribute to these resources and to learn new ideas and approaches to professional identity formation from colleagues across the country. While these resources are related, they have different purposes:

Resource #1: A repository of law school implementation plans for Standard 303(b)(3). This database, in Google Sheets, is intended to capture law schools’ evolving plans to implement Standard 303(b)(3). Each school is requested to share a narrative describing its Standard 303(b)(3) plan, as well as whether that plan is currently in draft or approved form. Schools are encouraged to provide a full description of their plans to help share creative and effective ways to implement this new Standard. This Google Sheet also asks for contact information for the person at each school responsible for Standard 303(b)(3) implementation, as well as anyone else on your staff or faculty who will be taking the lead in any specific professional identity formation efforts (for example, related to academic support, career services, clinics, externships, legal writing, doctrinal courses, etc.). Each school is also encouraged to provide links to any related web-based materials and to submit any other supporting documents through this Dropbox. While anyone with the link to this Google Sheet can review the submitted plans and contact information details, this document should be completed by the person at each school responsible for compliance with Standard 303(b)(3).

Resource #2: A clearinghouse of specific ideas, techniques, strategies, and tools related to professional identity formation. We know that many of you are already doing impactful work in this area, regardless of your title and the capacity in which you engage with students. This database, also in Google Sheets, provides a means to share those great efforts and learn new ideas from other law school faculty and staff across the country. Anyone who is engaged in professional identity formation efforts—big or small—is encouraged to share their ideas, as well as their contact information. This database is organized broadly in tabs across the bottom by the general area of student engagement, including academic support, career services, clinical / experiential classes, doctrinal classes, lawyering skills classes, student organizations, and professional formation courses. Within each tab, contributors are asked to indicate the primary professional identity focus of the exercise, program, or reflection and to include additional information, including the primary contact person for that contribution. We hope this format makes it easy for you to search for techniques and strategies that might be useful for you. In addition to providing a description of the professional identity work you are doing, you are encouraged to submit to this Dropbox any supporting documents that might be helpful for others, including syllabi, course plans, teaching notes, assessment tools, and grading rubrics.

A note on scope: As described above, these two new crowdsourced resources are focused primarily on Standard 303(b)(3), which relates to professional identity formation. The ABA has also implemented a new Standard 303(c), which requires law schools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism (1) at the start of the program of legal education; and (2) at least once before graduation.” Most of us working in this general space understand that bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism are foundational topics within professional identity formation. As a result, you and your school should feel free to share in the databases above specific implementation plans and strategies related to Standard 303(c). However, our primary focus is Standard 303(b)(3). We also encourage you to visit Buffalo School of Law’s Website on ABA Standard 303(c) for more specific information about efforts across the country to implement Standard 303(c).

We wish you and your law schools the best of luck as you create institutional plans and design specific techniques for implementation. Hopefully the two databases announced above will help you come up with impactful and effective ways to engage in this important work. We encourage you to share your ideas, to borrow from others, and to connect with other faculty and staff exploring professional identity formation.

Aric Short, Professor of Law and Director of the Professionalism & Leadership Program, Texas A&M University School of Law

September 6, 2022 by hami3258

Older Posts

Newer Posts