Browsing Tag

Lawyering Skills

Professional Identity Formation and the NextGen Bar Open Opportunities for Law Student and Law School Success

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law & Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Neil Hamilton, Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law (MN), has just published on SSRN another groundbreaking article on professional identity formation (PIF). As will be shown in a forthcoming blog post, Neil Hamilton is currently the most-cited author of PIF articles. In his latest article, he makes connections as no one else has between PIF and the NextGen Bar Exam.

Here is a link to Hamilton’s article: http://ssrn.com/abstract=5023491.

And here is the abstract:

All law faculty, staff, and students want students and graduates to be successful with respect to: (1) academic performance; (2) bar passage; (3) meaningful post-graduation employment; and (4) excellent service to clients and the legal system. Both the 2022 changes to ABA accreditation Standard 303 and the ongoing implementation of the NextGen Bar starting in five states in 2026 and ten more states in 2027 offer substantial opportunities for law students and law schools to achieve more success at these four goals.

The 2022 revision to accreditation Standard 303 requires that each law school must provide substantial opportunities each year for students to explore the core values of the profession that are foundational to successful legal practice. The National Conference of Bar Examiners and many state supreme courts, based on empirical evidence, are now moving to the NextGen Bar that encompasses a broader range of skills necessary for newly licensed lawyers successfully to practice law than the current bar examination.

These two changes are asking law faculty and staff to think about legal education in two fundamentally different ways to help students achieve greater success at the four goals above. The first fundamental change is that the organized bar through accreditation and the state supreme courts through the bar examination are signaling that law schools must give more attention to each student’s:

reflective exploration of the professional values foundational to successful legal practice; and
development of a wider range of foundational lawyering skills that a newly licensed lawyer (NLL) needs to practice law competently beyond knowledge of the foundational concepts of doctrinal law, issue spotting, legal analysis and reasoning (thinking like a lawyer), and legal research and writing. The NextGen Bar is adding four new foundational skills to be tested including Client Counseling and Advising, Client Relationship and Management, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, and Investigation and Analysis.

The second fundamental change, as explained later in this article, is that an effective curriculum to foster each student’s growth toward later stages of development regarding both the reflective exploration of professional values foundational to successful law practice and the four new NextGen Bar foundational skills build is different from the traditional thinking like a lawyer curriculum that emphasizes doctrinal law transmission, issue spotting, legal analysis, and legal research and writing. This article argues: (1) the core values foundationally inform the developments of the four new NextGen foundational skills; and (2) a student’s exploration and internalization of the profession’s core values and a student’s development of the NextGen Bar’s four new foundational skills will happen together in authentic professional experiences (that are or that mimic actual professional work) combined with coaching, feedback, guided reflection, and an action plan for a student to go to the next level on a skill.

The thesis of this article is that a law school that seizes the opportunity more effectively to foster (1) each student’s growth toward later stages of development on the core values of the profession, (2) each student’s understanding of how these core values are foundational for the skills of successful legal practice, and (3) each student’s development toward competence and excellence at the additional foundational skills the NextGen Bar is adding will see greater student and graduate success on all four goals in the first paragraph above. This helps both the students and the law school.

November 21, 2024 by hami3258

Debunking Common Misconceptions About Professional Identity Formation and Our Take on How to Incorporate it Into the 1L Skills Classroom

By: Marni Goldstein Caputo and Kathleen Luz, Senior Lecturers in Boston University School of Law’s Lawyering Program

Due to the American Bar Association’s (ABA) recent adoption of Standard 303(b)(3), the term “professional identity formation” is now used in a more widespread manner throughout law schools. But what, exactly, is it? And how, exactly, should it be introduced into the 1L curriculum? Further, why do law schools tend to downgrade the importance – or rigorousness – of professional identity formation? When they do so, they risk missing a critical opportunity to develop whole, purpose-driven, mindful future lawyers. We seek here to explain our unique take on professional identity formation, debunk some common misconceptions, and combat the relative institutional diminishment of the importance of 303(b)(3).

What is Professional Identity Formation?

ABA Standard 303(b)(3) mandates, somewhat vaguely, that “[a] law school shall provide substantial opportunities to students for: ….(3) the development of a professional identity.” ABA Interpretation 303-5 clarifies that vagueness, but only to a limited extent, stating:

Professional identity focuses on what it means to be a lawyer and the special obligations lawyers have to their clients and society. The development of professional identity should involve an intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice. Because developing a professional identity requires reflection and growth over time, students should have frequent opportunities for such development during each year of law school and in a variety of courses and co-curricular and professional development activities.

Thankfully, scholars have amply filled in the gaps with definitions like this one: “Professional identity is the way a lawyer understands [their] role relative to all of the stakeholders in the legal system, including clients, courts, opposing parties and counsel, the firm, and even the legal system itself (or society as a whole). Professional identity . . . encompass[es] the ideals each of us holds regarding our professional roles, and how we apply those ideals to the complex situations we encounter in our professional lives.”[1] Thus, professional identity formation involves looking inward and outward, reflecting not only on a student’s or lawyer’s own purpose, but on their role vis a vis others in the legal system. Below, we offer our take on what professional identity means and what formation of that identity entails.

Our Unique Take?

As 1L lawyering skills professors, we spend the majority of our time teaching “hard skills” – legal writing and analysis, oral communication skills, and others. But professional identity formation involves developing a different skill set — skills which have often been referred to as “soft skills.” We reject this nomenclature because it minimizes the importance of these skills. Thus, we refer to them as “character-based” skills, which are as critically important to the development of new lawyers and their professional identities.

Furthermore, we have coined unique terms to divide character-based skills into two categories:

Inward facing character-based skills are those necessary to the development of self, including a lawyer’s decision-making process, purpose, priorities, boundary-setting mechanisms, mindfulness, and well-being.[2]
Outward facing character-based skills are those necessary to interact with other stakeholders in the legal system like clients, colleagues, and judges; these skills include empathy, active listening, patience, and teamwork.[3]

Moreover, our unique perspective on professional identity formation rests on how we incorporate these skills into our 1L lawyering skills classroom. We believe that professional identity formation is not just a concept – it is an applied concept. Specifically, we teach it through the introduction, then practice, and then reflection of character-based skills. This process involves three steps:

Step 1 – Introducing the character-based skills: We introduce character-based skills through pre-reading and then a discussion of the reading in class. When possible, our discussion involves exploring the stories of real-life lawyers who either did – or did not – demonstrate these skills and the fallout from their successes or failures.
Step 2 – Practicing the character-based skills: We try to dive right into this stage as quickly as possible. We spend less time saying, “be an active listener” or “remember to know and protect your moral boundaries,” and more time connecting the use of these skills to graded research and writing assignments or simulations related to those assignments. For example, students may need to counsel a client who makes unethical suggestions after the student has researched and analyzed a core legal issue related to that client, as well as written a memo about that issue. Or students might be required to make choices and decisions in a pressurized lawyering scenario and use their discretion when choosing between two legally appropriate options. In the doing of these exercises, students practice the relevant character-based skills they just learned.
Step 3 – Reflecting on the skills: After students practice the skill, we reflect on what it felt like and how it went, and how they might improve that skill the next time they use it. Through this reflection, students finally connect their handling of this skill to the broader concept of their professional identity. For example, when they asked questions to their client, were they empathetic and/or did they actively listen? Do they feel comfortable with the power of discretion when making a choice? Where are their boundaries? What values shape those boundaries? How will they make difficult choices while honoring those values and boundaries? What is the state of the student’s current professional identity, and how will the student progress and grow?

In this way, we choreograph a progression in which students “back into” professional identity formation through learning character-based skills in a manner attached to graded assignments oriented around “hard skills.” Introducing these critical skills in this manner avoids amorphous discussions that serve to minimize their rigorousness. Rather, this method allows students to tie these character-based skills to other lawyering skills, hopefully causing them to draw upon those experiences in their future practice. Therefore, students begin the process of professional identity formation as early as the fall semester of their 1L year.

Why Are There Misconceptions About Professional Identity Formation?

The lack of clarity provided by the ABA’s standard and interpretation, and the ABA’s use of words like “values,” “principles,” and “well-being” to interpret it, can make professional identity seem less concrete, or even like an amorphous concept. As a result, it has sometimes mistakenly been perceived as a topic that can be addressed in a piecemeal, around-the-edges fashion. Or it can be erroneously cabined to the career office for 1Ls, to externships and clinics for 2Ls and 3Ls, and to a variety of summer jobs for all students.

Even further obscuring the perceived importance of 303(b)(3) was its concurrent inception with ABA Standard 303(c), which requires law schools to teach all students about bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism. Law schools properly viewed the critical 303(c) topics as intellectually rigorous. They charged ahead to tackle the 303(c) requirement, hired new faculty and staff, and created dedicated classes and graduation requirements. Though there are certainly some exceptions, 303(b)(3) was less at the forefront for most law schools. We believe that this relative backburner effect is the result of some common misconceptions.

Debunking Misconception #1: Professional Identity Formation is NOT the Same as Professionalism or Professional Responsibility

First, professional identity formation is not the same as professionalism or professional responsibility. “While there is some overlap existing between the two concepts, these concepts are separable, and there is value in articulating two separate definitions and goals in this work and in our teaching. . . .”[4] Moreover,“[t]he shift from ‘professionalism’ to ‘professional identity’ is far from semantic. Governed by ethical rules and bound by occupational decorum, professionalism is extrinsically oriented. By contrast, professional identity is internal and interwoven with one’s morals, values, and character–i.e., identity.”[5]

While we believe the word “professionalism” can be exclusive and alienating, and thus we avoid its use with students, that topic is for a different blog post. For our purposes here, we note that we do teach what is typically referred to as “professionalism” through our course policies and rules. We require timeliness, thoroughness, appropriate communication with our teams, attention to detail, and respectful email and communication etiquette. Though highly important for the formation of future lawyers, those skills are not innately tied to professional identity formation.[6] Though we deeply respect the work done by the career office to ready students for job searches (one of us was a career advisor for a decade), we also believe that instruction about attire, timeliness, cover letters, and interview tactics are not truly connected to professional identity formation.

Similarly, professional identity formation is not the same as the topics covered in professional responsibility class. Rather, “[i]t is no longer reasonable that a single, required course in professional responsibility will somehow suffice to instill the long-lasting and deep values in legal ethics expected by both the members of our profession, clients, and the American public.”[7] Thus, a single professional responsibility course cannot alone satisfy ABA Standard 303(b)(3). When professional identity is incorrectly combined with professionalism and professional responsibility, the importance and scope of professional identity formation as contemplated by ABA Standard 303(b)(3) are minimized. We believe that the teaching methods we described above counter these misconceptions and weave character-based skills into the core 1L lawyering curriculum in a way that showcases, rather than minimizes, the importance of 303(b)(3).

Debunking Misconception #2: Professional Identity Formation is NOT an Amorphous Concept

There is a common misconception that professional identity formation is best done through soul-searching and broad conversations about dreams, fears, identities, and purpose. We certainly have those amazing conversations with our students in office hours, at school activities, and in individual student conferences. However, they are meant to complement our curricular, in-class approach, which is highly structured and skills-driven. Notably, not all students are willing to participate in those types of broad conversations or internally reflect in that manner and thus, relegating professional identity formation to that space would be inherently exclusive.

Because we structurally and pedagogically tie professional identity formation opportunities to assignments and simulations, we reject the perspective that teaching professional identity formation is an amorphous endeavor. Rather, professional identity formation appears on our syllabus and arises in our classrooms like traditional lawyering topics. Students are aware at the outset that professional identity formation is part of our course, as it is listed in our outcomes on the syllabus. Our goal is for our students to place equal importance on developing “hard” and character-based skills.

Debunking Misconception #3: It is NOT Untenable to Add Professional Identity Formation to a Busy 1L Skills Curriculum

Yes, the 1L skills curriculum is packed and most of us have a laundry list of worthy skills we simply cannot cover. However, that does not mean there is no room for professional identity formation. Rather, as outlined above, it just means being more purposeful and strategic with the 1L skills curriculum and capitalizing on those potential opportunities. Further, the ABA requires “frequent opportunities for such development during each year of law school and in a variety of courses.” Therefore, there is really no room to skip 1L year in terms of creating these opportunities.

Additionally, the 1L lawyering skills class provides the perfect opportunity for this type of professional identity formation. “It is naive and unrealistic to assume that our students only begin to develop their professional identities when they enter the world of practice. In fact, students begin to develop their professional identities from the first day of law school . . .”[8] Through the use of carefully constructed assignments, replicating the representation of real-world clients, our students are pushed to “back into” professional identity formation. Attaching these opportunities to assignments allows for time within the curriculum, without displacing any other critical skills.

Conclusion

Our goal here is to convince the doubters that professional identity formation is meaty and meaningful, and that 303(b)(3) is just as important as 303(c). In so doing, we hope to dispel some of the common misconceptions and combat what we feel has been a certain degree of institutional diminishment of professional identity formation. Of course, as 1L lawyering skills professors we also hope to encourage our peers to strategically incorporate professional identity formation into their 1L lawyering skills courses and to consider the character-based “backing into” approach we outline above. Incorporating professional identity formation into the 1L skills curriculum is not difficult or distracting, in that it seamlessly complements and dovetails with skills they already teach. Further, developing exercises, simulations, and assignments that cause students to practice character-based skills, and thus contemplate their professional identities, is fun and allows for a tremendous amount of creativity in the classroom.

[1] Martin J. Katz, Teaching Professional Identity in Law School, 42 Colo. Law. 45, 45 (2013).

[2] Marni G. Caputo & Kathleen Luz, Beyond “Hard” Skills: Teaching Outward- and Inward-Facing Character-Based Skills to 1Ls in Light of ABA Standard 303(B)(3)’s Professional Identity Requirement, 89 Brook. L. Rev. 809, 817 (2024); see also M. Walsh Fitzpatrick & R. Queenan, Professional Identity Formation, Leadership and Exploration of Self, 89 UMKC L. Rev. 539 (2021).

[3] Caputo & Luz, supra; see also S. Daicoff, Law as a Healing Profession: The “Comprehensive Law Movement,” 6 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 1 (2006).

[4] David I. C. Thomson, “Teaching” Formation of Professional Identity, 27 Regent U. L. Rev. 303, 316 (2015).

[5] Eduardo R.C. Capulong, et al., Antiracism, Reflection, and Professional Identity, 18 Hastings Race & Poverty L. J. 3, 5 (2021).

[6] See Maureen R. Van Neste, Law Student Professional Development and Formation: Bridging Law School, Student, and Employer Goals, Neil W. Hamilton and Louis D. Bilionis (Cambridge University Press 2022), 167 Pages, 27 Legal Writing: J. Legal Writing Inst. 309 (2023).

[7] Miriam R. Albert & Jennifer A. Gundlach, Bridging the Gap: How Introducing Ethical Skills Exercises Will Enrich Learning in First-Year Courses, 5 Drexel L. Rev. 165, 169 (2012).

[8] Albert & Gundlach, supra.

Marni Goldstein Caputo (L) and Kathleen Luz (R) are a Senior Lecturers at Boston University School of Law, where they teach Lawyering Skills to first-year law students. Their scholarship focuses on professional identity formation, legal writing pedagogy, and learning science.

September 3, 2024 by hami3258

Felicia Hamilton, Jerome Organ

“We’re Always Shaping People”: Podcast Interview with Jerry Organ, Co-Director of the Holloran Center

By: Felicia Hamilton, Holloran Center Coordinator

Jerry Organ, Bakken Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Our very own Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership, Jerry Organ, was recently featured on the Legal Docket segment of the podcast The World and Everything in It: September 11, 2023 Episode. Legal correspondent Jenny Rough speaks with Organ, along with hosts Mary Reichard and Nick Eicher, about the revision to Standard 303(b), which encourages law schools to provide opportunities for the development of a student’s professional identity.

In the interview, Organ emphasizes the importance of identity formation in a career that is focused on serving others:

Law school… [is] about developing a specialized knowledge base and a specialized set of skills that are directed toward serving others. So, part of professional school really is a shift from a kind of a self-focus to now acquiring knowledge, acquiring skills. I’m going to shift from being a student absorbing information to a lawyer who’s now serving others.” [1]

He also highlights the need for law students to have the opportunity to discover and test out their professional interests along with the importance of being able to process those experiences with a faculty mentor or advisor, noting that at the start of second and third years of law school there is a rich opportunity to help students process their summer experience and then plan for next steps on their journey.

Organ also speaks to the importance of having courses like St. Thomas’s Serving Clients Well intensive, which highlights communication and relationship skills and encourages students to focus on client service and to act in accordance with their values.

According to Organ, law schools are “always shaping people. We just have tended not to be very thoughtful about it. And what this new movement is really talking about is trying to help us as law professors and people involved in legal education be more intentional about what it is we want to be communicating to our students about what it means to be a lawyer.”

Listen to the full podcast episode and read the transcription here! The interview can be heard starting at 08:45.

[1] Rough, Jenny. “Legal Docket: Law and service.” The World and Everything in It, World News Group, September 11, 2023, https://wng.org/podcasts/legal-docket-law-and-service-1694291807.

Jerome Organ is the Bakken Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law

Felicia Hamilton is the Coordinator for the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

September 29, 2023 by hami3258

David Grenardo

A Review of Roadmap

James Leipold served as the executive director of NALP (National Association for Law Placement) for over 18 years. He now works as a senior advisor with the Law School Admission Council (LSAC). Leipold wrote a thorough review of Neil Hamilton’s Third Edition of the award-winning book, Roadmap: The Law Student’s Guide to Meaningful Employment, published by the ABA. Leipold’s detailed and insightful review can be found here.

September 26, 2023 by gren2380

David Grenardo

2023 Baylor Law Leadership Symposium, Power of Speech: Creating Environments in Which Free Speech and Civil Discourse Thrive

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

On Thursday, September 28, 2023, Baylor Law School’s Leadership program, in conjunction with the AALS Leadership Section and Baylor Law Review, will host a symposium titled, “Power of Speech: Creating Environments in Which Free Speech Civil Discourse Thrive.” The symposium features national leaders in legal education and the legal profession, including the following individuals: Erwin Chemerinsky, the Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law at UC Berkeley School of Law; Deborah Enix-Ross of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, the Immediate Past ABA President; and Mark Alexander, the Arthur J. Kania Dean and Professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and President of the AALS.

The symposium will also showcase several national prominent leaders in professional identity formation, such as Leah Teague, Professor of Law and Director of the Leadership Development Program at Baylor Law School, Timothy W. Floyd, the Tommy Malone Distinguished Chair in Trial Advocacy and Director of Experiential Education at Mercer University School of Law, and Louis D. Bilionis, Dean Emeritus and Droege Professor of Law at Cincinnati College of Law, who is also a Holloran Center Fellow.

The symposium, which will take place from 12:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Central Time, is completely virtual. The full schedule of the symposium and speaker bios can be found here, and this registration link will allow you to sign up for this timely and enlightening symposium. We hope you can find time to attend some or all of this exciting event.

September 22, 2023 by gren2380

David Grenardo

Kill 1L: A Realistic Look at Legal Education Reform

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Prentiss Cox, a Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, previously published Law in Practice, a casebook to teach lawyering skills to first and second-year law students. His latest article, Kill 1L, proposes a bold, yet practical approach to reforming the 1L curriculum and experience to help develop law students into lawyers.

Here is the abstract of Professor Cox’s article:

Law school education has been extensively studied for decades, but changes have been modest. This Article makes the case that fundamental law school reform will not occur until we abolish the central pillar on which it rests—the current conception of the first year of law school, the “1L” experience. Many studies of law school curricula and pedagogy are sharply critical of the education offered, but they pull a punch when it comes to 1L. This Article compares recent data on 1L curricula at almost every U. S. law school with ABA-required law school statements of learning outcomes. The comparison reveals two contrasts: the gap between what is promised students for their legal education and what 1L delivers; and the gap between what is promised students and the actual use of law by attorneys, judges and even law professors in the modern world. The Article proposes a new 1L curriculum that would engage students in the law used by courts and policymakers while decreasing the demands placed on law students by the repetitive, inefficient legacy 1L curriculum.

A link to the article can be found here.

Should you have any questions or comments about the article, please feel free to contact Professor Cox at coxxx211@umn.edu.

September 19, 2023 by hami3258

David Grenardo

Integrating Artificial Intelligence Tools into the Formation of Professional Identity

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

The Holloran Center and the University of St. Thomas Law Journal brought together for the first time 1L and Professional Responsibility casebook authors to discuss ways to implement professional identity formation into the 1L curriculum and Professional Responsibility at the University of St. Thomas Law Journal’s spring 2023 symposium. One of the major reasons for this seminal gathering was to share ideas about professional identity formation amongst law schools from all across the country. Another reason was to generate excellent scholarship that could guide law schools as schools must now comply with the new ABA Standard 303 that requires law schools to provide substantial opportunities for law students to develop their professional identities.

Colleen Medill, the Robert & Joanne Berkshire Family Professor of Law and Director of Undergraduate Academic Programs at the Nebraska College of Law, delivered an amazing presentation at the symposium titled “Writing a Demand Letter: Litigator or Mediator” on a panel that focused on putting students in the role of lawyers, which is one of the ways law students move from law student to lawyer. She also authored an excellent, timely, and innovative article for the symposium issue, Integrating Artificial Intelligence Tools into the Formation of Professional Identity.

Here is the abstract of Professor Medill’s article:

My claim in this Article is that a lawyer’s personal use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the practice of law is now an essential component of a lawyer’s professional identity that must be intentionally developed as a law student before entering the practice of law. After demonstrating the strong connection between the use of AI tools in legal practice, the requirement of lawyer competence, and the formation of professional identity, the Article proposes four “best practices” principles for integrating AI tools with traditional lawyering skills exercises to assist students in the formation of professional identity. The Article concludes with an example that can be used in the first-year Property course.

A link to the article can be found here.

Should you have any questions or comments about the article, please feel free to contact Professor Medill at cmedill2@unl.edu.

September 12, 2023 by gren2380

David Grenardo

An Unexpected Synergy: How Integrating Professional Identity Formation Exercises in a Civil Procedure Course Not Only Help Students Form a Professional Identity but Also Enhance Their Understanding of Civil Procedure

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Professor Benjamin V. Madison III, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Formation at Regent University School of Law, authored a pretrial practice casebook, Civil Procedure for All States: A Context and Practice Casebook, which was one of the first casebooks that explicitly and intentionally incorporated professional identity formation as recommended by the Carnegie Institute study Educating Lawyers (2007). Madison presented at the University of St. Thomas Law Journal’s spring 2023 symposium, which brought together 1L and Professional Responsibility casebook authors to discuss how they infuse professional identity formation into the required curriculum. Madison’s latest article, An Unexpected Synergy: How Integrating Professional Identity Formation Exercises in a Civil Procedure Course Not Only Help Students Form a Professional Identity but Also Enhance Their Understanding of Civil Procedure, will be part of that symposium’s issue.

Here is the abstract of the article:

This article demonstrates that integrating professional identity formation exercises in a required course accomplishes multiple goals. The Carnegie report stated, “[l]egal analysis alone is only a partial foundation for developing professional competence and identity.” The report was clear that only the formation of values and the ability to exercise moral judgment would allow students to practice as true professionals. Both first-year and advanced civil procedure courses feature professional identity formation exercises. They present dilemmas litigators face, particularly ones that the Model Rules of Professional Conduct do not answer.

The article describes how the effectiveness of the exercises improved depending on how the professor assigned them. When students read the exercises and discussed them in class, along with cases and other reading, students showed less engagement in the complexity of moral and ethical questions. Conversely, when students wrote reflection papers on the exercises due before the class discussion, they displayed greater discernment than when students did not write reflections. After writing about the exercise, more students recognized that reflective lawyers balance multiple interests and the lawyer’s values in resolving an ethical/moral challenge. The examples explored in the article, as representative of the type of exercises, include various issues that arise in handling a civil suit. The sample exercises include a choice-of-forum decision, a client’s request to serve a defendant in a specific manner, and two discovery scenarios. The first discovery scenario depicts a lawyer deciding whether to set a trial and other deadlines later than necessary and how that affects the client, not to mention the lawyer’s financial gain if on a billable hour engagement. The second discovery example demonstrates efforts to use excessive production of documents to increase the chance that the discovering party misses key documents.

The benefits of the exercises were two-fold. As a routine, graded part of the course, students gained an appreciation for moral and ethical judgments not answered by the Model Rules. The courses’ learning objectives state that by engaging in the exercises, students would develop a professional identity that includes values and a moral compass that will answer questions not addressed by the Model Rules. Therefore, students cultivate values, a moral compass, and the ability to resolve dilemmas they will likely face in practice. An additional benefit was the improved grasp of the rules and doctrines connected to the scenarios. Although intended to promote professional identity development, the exercises also reinforced knowledge of the rules and doctrines that formed the context for the exercises. Hence, students learned these rules and doctrines better than if the exercise were left out.

A link to the article can be found here.

Should you have any questions or comments about the article, please feel free to contact Professor Madison at benjmad@regent.edu.

September 7, 2023 by gren2380

David Grenardo

Breaking Down Siloes and Building Up Students: The Transformational Possibilities of Professional Identity Formation

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Three national leaders in professional identity formation—Lindsey P. Gustafson, Aric K. Short, and Robin Thorner—came together to author an exceptional article focused on professional identity formation. Their article, Breaking Down Siloes and Building Up Students: The Transformational Possibilities of Professional Identity Formation, will be part of the University of St. Thomas Law Journal’s spring 2023 symposium issue that will explore pedagogies relating to professional identity formation.

Here is the abstract of the article:

Under the ABA’s sequenced approach to implementation of Standard 303(b)(3), schools should now have developed plans for providing opportunities for professional identity formation and should be implementing them. These plans must provide students with an “intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.” In addition, these plans should provide for frequent opportunities for development, “during each year of law school and in a variety of courses and co-curricular and professional development activities.”

Because Standard 303(b)(3) is necessarily tied to the unique character, existing structures, and available resources of a law school, each school’s plan will be different. That has been our experience as we have worked as professional identity formation leaders in different roles with varying perspectives: Lindsey Gustafson at the William H. Bowen School of Law, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, is a current Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and a skills and doctrinal professor; Aric Short at the Texas A&M School of Law is a former Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, a doctrinal professor, and currently serves as the Director of the Professionalism and Leadership Program; and Robin Thorner at St. Mary’s University School of Law is an Assistant Dean for Career Strategy, a teaching adjunct, and the current Director of Professional Identity Formation.

In this essay, we hope to emphasize that professional identity formation efforts can occur all across the law school’s operations, from administrative offices to classrooms to voluntary student activities. We also provide specific examples of how schools can be more intentional and explicit as they weave together multiple professional identity formation opportunities for their students. This process takes time and attention, but it creates a powerful whole-building approach to identity formation that not only complies with 303(b)(3), but also best positions our students for a successful, fulfilling, and impactful career in law.

A link to the article can be found here.

Should you have any questions or comments about the article, please feel free to contact any or all of the authors at lpgustafson@ualr.edu, ashort@law.tamu.edu, and rthorner@stmarytx.edu.

September 5, 2023 by gren2380

David Grenardo

Professional Responsibility and Professional Identity Formation in a Community of Practice with Alumni

By: David A. Grenardo, Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

Every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings…and Neil Hamilton finishes another article. Neil Hamilton, the Holloran Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law, has completed a new professional identity formation article. Hamilton wrote his latest article for the University of St. Thomas Law Journal’s spring 2023 symposium on professional identity formation. Hamilton’s article explores a new approach to the required Professional Responsibility course that provides reasonable coverage of the law of lawyering, legal analysis, and compliance, but also helps each student understand and participate in a community of practice focused on all the discretionary calls of lawyering in the area of the student’s ultimate practice interest. The student sees that legal ethics knowledge and capacities are not just doctrinal knowledge and legal analysis but are also social and situated in a community of practice. The student also sees that many alumni of the law school are successful in the practice of law while living into the values of the law school and the profession, not just compliance with the minimum floor of the law of lawyering. The student will also understand that in any practice area, the experienced lawyers know who can be trusted and who are the jerks. It will be the student’s and new lawyer’s choice which path to take.

Part II(A) of the article first outlines that the ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility (adopted by all 50 states with some variation) codify some values of the profession (like competence, diligence, confidentiality, and loyalty) into the law of lawyering with which licensed lawyers must comply. Part II(A) also explains that many of the Rules give discretion to practicing lawyers with respect to choices about conduct above the floor of the Rules. Part II(B) then analyzes the core values in the mission and learning outcomes of some law schools, and in the Preamble to the Model Rules, that help guide each lawyer’s discretionary decision-making. Part III analyzes how communities of practice influence lawyers in making the discretionary calls of lawyering in a way consistent with the profession’s core values. Part IV explores empirical evidence on whether practicing lawyers think their legal education was an effective community of practice fostering their understanding of these core values in making the discretionary calls of lawyering. Part V discusses Hamilton’s own Professional Responsibility course that creates communities of practice with students and alumni to help students understand the importance of the law school’s and the profession’s core values in making the discretionary calls of lawyering.

A link to Hamilton’s article can be found here.

David Grenardo is a Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

August 9, 2023 by gren2380

Older Posts