Browsing Tag

Research

Introduction to the Definition of Professional Identity and the Formation of a Professional Identity

By: Neil Hamilton, Holloran Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions, University of St. Thomas School of Law

This short Holloran Center definition of student professional identity and the formation of a professional identity is the result of a process of inquiry, dialogue within the Center and with others nationally, and reflection since the founding of the Center in 2006. Starting in 2006, the Center focused on synthesizing the core values of the profession from the Preamble to the Model Rules, the three ABA reports and the Conference of Chief Justice Reports on Professionalism, legal scholars’ definitions of professionalism, and our study of how exemplary lawyers defined the core values of the profession.

Providentially, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching published Educating Clergy, the first of its empirically-based studies of higher education for the professions in 2006, followed by Educating Lawyers in 2007, Educating Engineers in 2009, and Educating Nurses and Educating Physicians, in 2010. The Carnegie studies introduced “professional identity” and “professional formation” as central to each new entrant’s development in higher education for all of the professions including legal education.

By 2012, we thought that “professional identity” and “professional formation” were more useful than “professionalism” because: (1) they incorporated the same core values; (2) they were terms applicable across higher education for the professions which both increased their fundamental importance and meant that we could learn from higher education in the other professions; and (3) they avoided the narrow understanding of many practicing lawyers that “professionalism” was principally focused on respect for others.

Since 2012, the Center has been in a continuous process of further inquiry, dialogue, and reflection to create a short definition of professional identity and professional identity formation that emphasizes both the two most foundational core values of the legal profession (off of which all the other needed capacities and skills needed to practice law build), and also the journey for students to internalize and demonstrate the two foundational core values. Notably, the two foundational values are emphasized in every major faith tradition and nearly all of the major secular philosophies.

We have a consensus among the two co-directors, the associate director, and the three Holloran Center Fellows, and we offer this Holloran Center short definition of both professional identity and professional identity formation to inform your dialogue and reflection on the Standard 303 revisions.

What Is a Law Student’s Professional Identity and What Is Professional Identity Formation? — A Short Introduction
Holloran Center – September 2022

Generally speaking, professional identity is “a representation of self, achieved in stages over time, during which the characteristics, values, and norms of the … profession are internalized, resulting in an individual thinking, acting, and feeling like a … [member of the profession].”

For law students and lawyers more specifically, we can synthesize a succinct definition of professional identity from the Preamble to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, the four major reports on professionalism from the ABA and the Conference of Chief Justices, and Holloran Center research. For law students and lawyers, professional identity is grounded in two foundational norms and values that law students and lawyers must understand, internalize, and demonstrate:

a deep responsibility and commitment to serving clients, the profession, and the rule of law;
a commitment to pro-active continuous professional development toward excellence at all the competencies needed to serve others well in the profession’s work.

“Professional identity formation” is a developmental process beginning in law school and extending over a career that “should involve an intentional exploration of the values, guiding principles, and well-being practices considered foundational to successful legal practice.”

Professional identity formation principally involves a process of socialization. The professional-to-be begins as an outsider to the professional community and its ways, values, and norms. Through experiences over time, inside and outside the classroom and the law school, the individual gradually becomes more and more an insider, “moving from a stance of observer on the outside or periphery of the practice through graduated stages toward becoming a skilled participant at the center of the action.”

The process continues throughout one’s career and features “a series of identity transformations that occur primarily during periods of transition” often marked by anxiety, stress, and risk for the developing professional. This process of socialization is a product of the developing lawyer’s social interactions and activities in environments authentic to the legal profession’s culture and enriched by coaching, mentoring, modeling, reflection, and other supportive strategies.

We hope this definition of professional identity and this description of professional identity formation can serve as a useful entry point for a law school’s faculty and staff interested in discussing and reflecting upon professional identity and professional identity formation in the context of the mission of the law school.

Please click below to view the definition with its endnotes.

Defining Professional Identity and Professional Identity Formation

Neil Hamilton is 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 in Minnesota.

September 21, 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

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

Angela Schultz

Can Participation in Pro Bono Service Increase Student Well-Being? I’ve Seen It Happen

By Angela F. Schultz, Assistant Dean for Public Service, Marquette Law School

I have been at Marquette Law School for eleven years. Over the years, I have witnessed students become more willing and able to identify and discuss mental health challenges they have faced in their own lives—challenges the students themselves have described as stress, anxiety, depression, and sometimes as trauma. I remember one recent student who lost both parents during their first year of law school. Another student took a leave of absence and was hospitalized for severe anxiety. If you work with law students, you also know some of the challenges facing students’ well-being.

I can think of three recent conversations where students identified their involvement in pro bono service as being among the factors that ultimately aided them on a path towards wellness. These three students’ experiences are not unique. Each year, we evaluate student experience in pro bono clinics. Comments from a recent survey included: “This work reminds me why I came to law school in the first place.” “I was afraid of working one-on-one with a client because I didn’t realize I already had skills that could be helpful.” “I feel connected to the people served in the clinic. These are my people.”

Before I go on, let me acknowledge that pro bono service can come with a dose of fatigue, vicarious trauma, and feeling overwhelmed by the poverty, despair, and inequity in our legal system and in our world. But right now, in this brief blog post, I’m focusing on how serving others can contribute to one’s well-being.

According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT), all human beings require regular experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness to thrive and maximize their positive motivation. See Sheldon, Kennon M. and Krieger, Lawrence S., Understanding the Negative Effects of Legal Education on Law Students: A Longitudinal Test and Extension of Self-Determination Theory (July 2006). Pro bono service opportunities regularly offer all three.

Autonomy: Pro bono service often involves a student making a choice to engage in something of interest to them; to do something they want to do or something they believe in; and the ability to take initiative and be self-directed. At many law schools (though not all), pro bono is a voluntary activity. Students choose whether to get involved in pro bono service and how much service to do. Students often choose what kind of service to perform and may enjoy increased autonomy as they develop skills.

Competence: Pro bono clinics tend to be places where volunteers all get a chance to feel good at what they do, or at least the opportunity to make progress towards becoming good at what they are learning to do. Pro bono clinics are an avenue where students can gain skills. Looking again at the pro bono evaluation I send to students each year, students indicated the following skills were practiced frequently during pro bono service work: listening; the ability to see the world from another’s perspective; client interviewing; time management; communicating legal information in an understandable way to a client; creative problem solving; and legal/procedural issue spotting.

Relatedness: Pro bono service often (if not always) offers students opportunity to relate meaningfully with others. In our pro bono clinics (called, not surprisingly, the Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinics), law students are paired with volunteer attorneys to serve a client seeking civil legal aid. The lawyer/student pair gets to chat with each other and develop relationships. The client served by the lawyer/student pair typically brings a whole range of human experiences to the mix, from frustration and despair to hope and gratitude. The trio of lawyer, student, and client often laugh together, shake their heads in disturbance together, and sometimes experience victory together. For example, one team recently negotiated a $500 settlement during their time together with a creditor suing their client (a mother of three earning $16 per hour) when her cash loan of $250 ballooned quickly to $1,500. By the end of their two-hour shift, when victory had been achieved, the client asked me to take a photo of her with the law student and lawyer. Without a doubt, meaningful relatedness had occurred for everyone involved in that session.

Autonomy, competence, and relatedness are the experiences cited by research that lend to students’ feelings of positive motivation and well-being.

I’d like to suggest one more reason that pro bono involvement may lend to feelings of well-being: perspective.

Perspective: Pro bono service connects students to the community outside of law school. Law school takes up an extraordinary amount of time, energy, and money for months (and sometimes years) before the student even has their first day. Students sometimes live, drink, and breathe all things related to LSAT preparation. Then soon after they live, drink, and breathe all things related to the law school application process. Then the actual law school experience begins which often presents students with the most academically challenging materials they have seen throughout their education. And law school almost always involves a student’s first experience with a mandatory grading curve. Students’ social lives tend to fill quickly with other law students. The overall experience can be insular and leave students questioning their very identity: Who am I now? Who will I be once I graduate from law school?

Pro bono service is a quick and vivid reminder of the vast world outside of all-things-law-school. People seeking pro bono legal services are getting by (sometimes barely) while facing excruciating circumstances. A law students’ LSAT score is not even remotely part of the list of challenges facing a client in the legal clinic preparing to represent themselves in their eviction hearing tomorrow. The C- grade a law student received in civil procedure somehow seems miniscule once they are hearing directly from a survivor of domestic violence seeking a civil protection order.

The student who lost both parents during their first year of law school pointed to their experience in the pro bono clinics as a significant part of their path towards creating a “new normal” for themselves. And the student hospitalized for severe anxiety cited her work with “real people” in the pro bono clinics as part of her own journey towards wellness.

Please contact me at angela.schultz@marquette.edu with comments or questions.

Angela F. Schultz
Assistant Dean for Public Service
Marquette Law School
AALS Section on Pro Bono & Access to Justice, 2022 Chair

August 31, 2022 by hami3258

Thiadora Pina

California, but not Dreaming: The Story of a Successful Mandatory 1L Professional Identity Course

By Thiadora A. Pina, Clinical Professor & Director of the Externship Program,
Santa Clara University School of Law

At Santa Clara University School of Law (SC Law), our Critical Lawyering Skills Seminar is a mandatory, 1-credit first-year course. The course is designed to develop our 1L’s professional identity, which includes cultural intelligence, values, and law student and lawyer wellness. Since 2018, our course evaluations remain overwhelmingly positive. Moreover, this high level of success is consistently achieved across eighteen small sections and all ten professors who teach this course.

The 1L Critical Lawyering Skills Seminar (CLSS) develops our law students’ professionalism by focusing on the top lawyering competencies students need to succeed and enter practice. Fortunately, we do not have to guess or rely on individual ideas or experiences to understand how law students can best prepare to enter the legal market and thrive as new lawyers. The work has been done for us.

There are multiple studies that clearly tell us which skills, characteristics, and values are important for new and successful lawyers. CLSS uses this data, in conjunction with the principles of positive psychology and andragogy, to ground its pedagogy. CLSS relies on the following studies:

Foundations for Practice (IAALS) (2016)
Attorneys General/Non-Profit (ROADMAP) (2018)
Small and Large Firms (ROADMAP) (2018)
Predicting Lawyer Effectiveness (Shultz/Zedeck) (2011)
Building a Better Bar (IAALS) (2020)

CLSS helps students think strategically about their professional identity and the critical skills they need to practice law successfully by focusing on the top competencies these studies identified as necessary for first-year lawyers. Collectively, the following competencies bubbled to the top:

Because SC Law was an early adopter of this focused pedagogy, the challenge was how to teach and scale this course across the 1L class. Other than Neil Hamilton’s ROADMAP text, no other widely circulated curriculum focused on law student professional identity formation. Nonetheless, SC Law remained committed.

This commitment eventually led to developing and adopting a professional identity curriculum packaged (with ROADMAP) into an interactive Workbook, Essential Lawyering Skills: A Companion Guide to Neil W. Hamilton’s ROADMAP (ELS), published in September 2021 by ABA Publishing.

ELS is data driven and builds upon ROADMAP’s strong foundation by providing activities that personalize each student’s path to professional identity and meaningful employment. ELS enables students to take charge of their own professional development and strengthen the lawyering skills legal employers have identified as necessary for first-year lawyers to succeed.

Because CLSS is a mandatory first-year experiential course, SC Law designed its curriculum for consistency. When ELS is paired with ROADMAP, the ELS Student Workbook and ELS Professor Manual provide a turnkey solution for those instructors and schools focused on law student professional development.

Essential Lawyering Skills: Thiadora A. Pina, Laura E. Jacobus, Rupa Bhandari (ABA Publishing, 2021). Visit the ABA website or https://www.pinbuspd.com/ for more information.

The ELS Workbooks are also adaptable. For example, some schools may not have dedicated professional identity courses, or they may choose to teach large class sections or teach during orientation or school breaks. The ELS Workbooks have a modular design, which can be separated into different parts. Schools and professors may choose any individual module or pair several modules together.

The “traditional” course syllabus for the class only includes SC Law requirements and basic class policy, but the content of the class can be found in the ELS Workbook that each small section of CLSS uses. Attached below are the Table of Contents for the ELS Student Workbook (SW) and the ELS Professor Manual (PM), which provide a substantive preview of the class.

ELS Student Workbook (SW) and the ELS Professor Manual (PM)

You are also welcome to contact Thiadora Pina directly: tpina@scu.edu with questions regarding either the books or the CLSS course. Good luck and have fun implementing the new Standard!

Thiadora A. Pina
Clinical Professor
Director, Externship Program
Faculty Advisor: BLSA + First-Gen Law Student Association
Santa Clara University School of Law
Essential Lawyering Skills (ABA 2021)
email | tpina@scu.edu
Website | https://law.scu.edu/externship/
phone | 408.551.3268

August 29, 2022 by hami3258

Christopher Corts

Better Conversations? Let’s Talk About It

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

Hello, reader! Today I am writing the first of a two-part series that will explore why and how we might facilitate better public conversations, especially when they include controversial topics. In today’s entry, Part I, I will explain why I think new ABA Standards 303(b) and (c) present an opportunity to have some hard but necessary public conversations. I will also share some thoughts on why we should have those conversations, why those conversations can be so difficult, and what we can reasonably expect them to accomplish. (Spoiler alert: not much! Even so, I think they are important for reasons I will explain.)

In a future blog post, Part II, I will give concrete ideas for how to plan and facilitate public conversations in a slower, less reactive, more intentional, inclusive, and meaningful way.

Whenever I facilitate a public conversation, my aim is to try and find a way to facilitate mutual compassion, respect, and trust among participants from the very start. Trust makes broader participation more likely. In my experience, when trust exists, it can also improve the quality of conversation by improving the likelihood that candid, authentic points of view will be voiced—and heard. We should want everyone to leave the conversation thinking something like: “I appreciate the opportunity to finally speak from my heart, and I have appreciated hearing others speak from theirs.” (Why I think this is so important will likely become clearer as you read on.)

Facilitating these kinds of conversations will be especially important as we implement new ABA standard 303(b) & (c). At the risk of understatement: there is nothing close to universal agreement about these standards. Even so, they exist. Now what?

Well…let’s talk about it.

For the unfamiliar: new ABA standard 303(b) mandates that “a law school shall provide substantial opportunities to students for…the development of a professional identity.” New ABA Standard 303(c) specifies that, as part of its curriculum, “a law school shall provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism.”[i]

Considered together, these two new standards suggest 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 must help students learn how to detect, address, and overcome the pernicious effects of racism and bias [Standard 303(c)] in our own profession.

“We” cannot credibly pretend to hold a unified, consensus point of view on any of this. And if you disagree with me …I invite you to take issue with me which helps to illustrate the point.

Talking about racism and bias introduces language, concepts, and (different) preferred modes of discourse. Educating students about racism and bias from a distance will not do. We desperately need to assume a curious, searching, self-aware, self-critical approach. And as we do: welcome the many different perspectives on what is worthy of criticism in our community.

This might be unpleasant—but it is not unhealthy. A healthy community must learn to live in conversation with itself through serious conflicts, or it cannot exist as a community. We need to model for our students a way of facilitating conversations designed to do that. Especially because we live and work in a dominant culture that indulges in calling-out more than conversation, values casting-out more than confession, and is more eager to cancel—or complain about cancelling—than showing signs of contrition.

We are a roiling mess, you may have noticed.

The American Bar Association’s “Profile of the Profession,” published annually, can help us start the hard conversations that we need to have. Before we get to any discussion of values, politics, perceptions, policies, aspirations, or goals….we need to understand who “we” are, demographically, and work our way out from there. Historically—and in the year 2022, specifically—where, when, and how well have we included (dare we ask: how well have we welcomed?) people of color, women, sexual minorities, people with disabilities, and other historically-excluded-or-marginalized people into all the corners of our profession?

To be sure, the data paints an encouraging picture of progress. Things are better, yes! And still so horrible. The data also paints a sobering, bleak, and utterly pathetic picture of how we continue to struggle to undo the stubbornly pernicious effects of America’s long history of racism, bias, and exclusion. With a shared understanding of the current demographic data (and recent trends) in view, we can move on to voicing the harder, more contestable, and wildly variable personal perceptions, beliefs, experiences, commitments, political convictions, and values that, collectively, are represented among us.

My own experience participating and facilitating hard conversations began over two decades ago, prior to law school, in a different profession. While pursuing a master’s degree in theology, I began to train and engage in ecumenical and inter-religious dialogues about a range of hotly-contested political, theological, and social issues. In recent years, in partnership with the Inner Work Center (formerly known as the Chrysalis Institute, located in my hometown of Richmond, Virginia), I have moderated a series of public conversations involving faith leaders who represent six of the world’s religious traditions, on a range of hot topics related to living, dying, sin, grace, justice, and social transformation. And, like all law professors, I have had many opportunities to either participate in or facilitate hard conversations in and out of the classroom with students, faculty, staff, and alums. (Most recently, these kinds of conversations have tended to recur in my work as a co-facilitator of a spiritual well-being program for first-generation 1Ls, called Just Practice; as co-facilitator of a Law, Race, and Power (LRP) Speaker’s Series; and as co-facilitator of a LRP spin-off program, Let’s Talk About It).

All of these experiences have helped me appreciate the value of a form of conversation that is distinct from arguments or debates. The point of these conversations is to speak with courage, hear with compassion, and be heard without being contradicted. And, by doing that, to simply know ourselves and each other better.

The starting point for these conversations is a mutual agreement to forswear any attempt to try and correct or convert dissenters. All speakers are liberated to voice their point of view without being interrupted, corrected, confronted, contradicted, or condescended-to. It is conversation that permits error, tolerates confusion, extends grace to the mistaken or offensive. It is focused on bringing hidden things to light—the deepest hopes, fears, grievances, and frustrations that too often remain hidden beneath the surface in everyday discourse. It is not a conversation that is burdened by usefulness; it is not designed to fix anything, resolve anything, or identify any commonality or unity. It is conversation that is beautiful and pleasing because it invites everyone present to speak and be heard if they wish, on topics of their choosing.
At their best, these kinds of public airings elucidate the sharp contours of conflict and difference. It’s hard work; many of us prefer conflict-avoidance. Speaking with candor and authenticity takes courage, but hearing those things without reacting or making snap-judgments does, too. To speak and hear things that expose deep differences requires a kind of humility and curiosity, a willingness to risk, and a radical tolerance. The goal is to get it all out—to hear “it” all, whatever “it” may be. And then to just let it be, for now.

In my experience, these kinds of conversations can be hard in two senses. First, they require at least some participants to hear and understand information that is in tension with—or possibly even in direct contradiction to—their perceptions, values, political commitments, religious convictions, or personal experiences. Everyone will likely hear (albeit at different times) stupid, offensive, wrong-headed, poorly-reasoned, outrageous, misguided, flat-wrong things. But this is not a problem; it is the point, really.

And so, hard as it may be…to engage in this conversation requires everyone to buy-in to the premise that it might be difficult to join in this conversation. Public displays of emotion are possible, maybe even likely. And that is ok. And everyone, of course, must be free to exit themselves from the conversation if they wish, whenever they wish.

These kinds of conversations are also “hard” in a second sense—in the way that they can tax the patience and goodwill of everyone participating in them. These kinds of conversation take a lot of time, intention, planning, and discipline. Bluntly: hard conversations do not seem to accomplish much. This can be especially irritating for lawyers, who tend to suffer from acute time deprivation. Most of us have been taught to value efficiency, crave productivity, and adopt a bias toward action. We are valued for our issue-spotting and problem-solving capabilities. It is hard to have a conversation that is not a means to some clear, desirable end.

For me? They can be difficult. But I have learned to appreciate how these conversations give a clearer field of perception, a sharper and more nuanced view of just how diverse, different, disunified, and riddled with conflict, division, and disagreement we really are. And I experience a strange satisfaction when, after the conversation, I can continue to dialogue and converse casually with the participants knowing more about just how radically different we are, in some ways—while enjoying the mystery of how we are able to co-exist with genuine kindness, respect, and civility, just the same.

On that hopeful and buzz-killing note, I will conclude this Part I. Next time, in Part II of this series, I will share concrete suggestions for how you might plan and execute public conversations about difficult topics in a way that is most likely to include the most people and elicit the most candid, forthright, and sincere comments possible—especially the ones that are voiced in criticism or dissent.

Until then…if you have any questions, concerns, or comments you would like to share, please email me! I would love to hear from you. You can reach me at ccorts@richmond.edu.

Christopher Corts, Contributor

[i] For a helpful introduction to these standards, see Neil W. Hamilton and Louis D. Bilionis, “Revised ABA Standards 303(b) and (c) and the Formation of a Lawyer’s Professional Identity, Part 1: Understanding the New Requirements,” PDQ in NALP Bulletin+ (May 2022).

August 26, 2022 by hami3258

Janet Stearns

Postcard from Miami

By Janet Stearns, Dean of Students, University of Miami School of Law
August 24, 2022

We have just concluded our orientation week at the University of Miami School of Law. I thought that I would share some lessons learned from this year’s program as we all work to set the right tone on well-being and mindfulness.

This year, day 2 of orientation included rotating programs for all of our incoming JD students:
–Mindfulness & Well-Being
–Academic Integrity & Professional Identity
–Inclusion, Belonging & Professional Identity
–Panels of upper-level students sharing advice and insights with the 1L’s.

While we included some aspects of all of these themes in past years, the focus on ABA Standard 303 guided us to sharpen our message in some important ways.

The Mindfulness & Well-Being program was the culmination of a powerful collaboration throughout this summer between my colleagues Jack Townsend, a Miami Law graduate who joined our team one year ago as an Assistant Director of Student Life, Scott Rogers, Director of our Mindfulness in Law Program, and Marcia Narine Weldon, Director of our Transactional Skills Program, and a consultant on legal coaching particularly in the area of growth mindset and lawyer well-being.

We framed our presentation to address and respond to three concerns common to many 1Ls.

First, the feeling of overwhelm.

During this section, I spoke of the importance of managing time to balance school obligations and goals with self-care and other personal priorities. Drawing on the work of Steven Covey, in his book First Things First, I used a jar to demonstrate the importance of identifying our life’s big priorities (i.e., the “big rocks”) and find strategies for ensuring that all of the big rocks can fit into the jar. One goal is to identify the big goals during these next three years of law school. Another is to manage time so that we don’t waste it all on “little rocks” so that we can’t get to our “big rocks.” As you can see the jar also includes a tea bag (because we can never be too busy for a cup of tea with a friend.) All members of the panel reflected on our own valuable self-care practices and how we managed time to support these practices as well as our other life goals.

Next, concerns about fear.

To this, Marcia drew on a range of practices to manage fear, from breathing exercises, movement exercises, and tapping. She reflected on her own recent travels (to Machu Picchu) and her consulting with law firms and major corporations around professional coaching. She spoke also about the power of growth mindset to tame fears, enhance our brains and emotions, and develop confidence. All members of the panel reflected on tools that we used to address fears in law school and beyond.

Third, self-doubt in law school, including imposter syndrome. This provided the foundation for Scott to discuss and demonstrate the power of mindfulness practices in law school. Scott shares a powerful image from his book Mindfulness for Law Students that depicts the “Roller Coaster of E-Motion.” Scott spoke to the ways that mindfulness can train our mind to have awareness of the patterns that sabotage our “freeway of flow” where we can best focus on law school and our other pursuits. This section then led into a mindfulness exercise for all.

In between each of these three sections, Jack invited each student to reflect and write on a designed card; students had five minutes to journal. The goals were both to provide opportunity for self-reflection and also to document each student’s emotions and insights from the session. At the conclusion of the program, each student was asked to put the card in a sealed envelope with his/her/their name on the cover.

Our intention is to return the cards to the students in November near the end of the semester and before finals. We hope that this will provide a reminder of their own thoughts on tackling overwhelm, fear, and self-doubt as they gear up for the end of the semester “push.”

Measuring the efficacy of our interventions is a challenge for me, and one that I am striving to address in the upcoming year. Anecdotally, I will note that I attended a reception for one of our affinity groups four days after this program. Several students came up to me to tell me that they had been pondering their “big rocks.” Students have also approached me to obtain information on where I am practicing yoga (one of the self-care activities I spoke about) and how they could join. Each and every one of these encounters suggests positive steps as we build our community of well-being and model our own approaches to integrating wellness with our professional identities.

I welcome comments and opportunities to learn from others as to how you are addressing these important topics in Orientation 2022.

You may contact me at jstearns@law.miami.edu.

August 24, 2022 by hami3258

Newer Posts