Jared, I was surprised at how responsive DS was. Were you? It seems like you created an opportunity, probably in part because you were thoughtful about your tone. He asked about midterms-- which indicates that he may be open to "encouraging" professors to add evaluative assignments. What those assignments are can probably be negotiated.

If he's open to adding assignments that develop and measure skills that create effective lawyers, it might be good to think of some proposals for what those skills are. For example: written and oral communication, collaboration, persuasion, negotiation, building and maintaining relationship with a client.... Then a few proposals for assignments tailored to honing those skills.

At this point the final exam is probably not leaving, so for now supplementing it would help. One idea is an un-timed, take-home fact pattern with a strict word limit (to encourage professor buy-in) early in the year to be handed in and returned with written feedback from a professor. Ideally, shared on a class blog so you could learn from others. This might help make the final exam a less random evaluation and would probably have independent learning value as well.

TA sections seem like a good idea too, if they have a purpose in their own right and don’t become a semester-long exam prep session. Maybe each TA section could be responsible for a group project (developing research, oral + written, and collaborative skills). Something like a research project on a topic in a given subject (like rent control or co-ops v. condos in a Property class) or even get some practical learning experience and, for example, write a contract in contracts.

Maybe suggest creating student focus groups to work on this with DS.

Anyway, this is very exciting and cool that you did this. -- SamanthaWishman - 28 Jun 2012

I understand that this will take a lot of students serving as TAs, but I think enough students will sign up with the right incentives. Another option would be to increase the amount of professors and to have only small sections (40 max) for 1L courses. This would allow professors to look over more exams themselves and thus less TAs would be needed.

I will e-maill him personally to address the concerns mentioned to you earlier. Columbia has a duty, especially considering how much this education costs, to prepare us to be the best lawyers we can be. It's about time the training given matched up with this duty.

Thanks for your comments - I will try to incorporate them into a follow-up, though I would encourage you to e-mail him independently as well. I wrote back to the dean telling him I would respond more substantively in the next few days. Any other suggestions, especially concrete proposals addressing the lack of adequate feedback?

-- JaredMiller - 27 Jun 2012

I don't agree with most of the Dean's points, and I see the e-mail as dismissive of many of the issues you raised. For instance, there is not necessarily a parallel between a socratic conversation in class and performance on an exam. Exam writing is an art, and an art that Columbia law professors never taught. Many of us were successful seeking other programs that taught proper exam writing, but many of us were not. Thus, exam performance does not signal intelligence or improvement in the socratic method, but rather who was able to figure out the art of exam writing on their own the fastest. Also, it is rare that a class will actually factor class performance into account of the "grade" one receives (e.g. Con Law with Metzger or Civ Pro with Gluck in my experience).

Many of our professors (e.g. Rap for Torts) are lazy and really don't teach students. Then, we are supposed to receive grades that signify our aptitude or capability in the legal profession. However, and I think this should be emphasized to the Dean to in a follow up e-mail as well, we do not put enough emphasis on the practical skills one needs to perform at a high level in the legal profession. We need more emphasis on legal writing. One hour/week course is not enough.

Law school should teach us the practical skills we need. We should not have to learn these skills from our first place of employment after graduation. Grades are not reflective of legal aptitude, especially after the first year of law school with relatively little feedback in most cases. Midterms could help, but the best change would be an exam writing course either to replace legal methods or as an optional course along with legal methods before classes begin.

When I taught before law school, I could not test students on material without making sure I adequately prepared them for the assessment. If law school is all about the art of exam writing during the first year, Columbia should teach it to us before classes officially begin. If students choose not to subscribe to its method, that is on them. However, they should at least give us some guidance so the assessments can be as fair as possible.

Please let me know if you have sent the e-mail because I would like these initiatives presented to the Dean as well. There is a lot of good work of this thread. This is what Eben wanted us to do. Learn how to change institutions/law using innovative/creative strategies. If we bring it to the "powers that be," they will have to listen to us.

Dear Jared,

Thanks for your thoughtful email, which I will share with others who are working with me on a set of related issues. It is useful to us to have a sense of your thoughts on this important subject.

One issue that I have been discussing with faculty is the importance of having either a model answer or hosting a session to talk about an exam. We want to be sure that faculty follow a set of best practices in this regard.

It soulds like this is partially but not completely responsive to what you are asking for.

Another initiative we are discussing involves incorporating more writing assignments in the first year small section in order to ensure that first year students, in their first semester, receive more feedback and have a more interactive experience in their first year.

Would you also like us to encourage faculty to give midterms? Or are there other specific ideas that you would like us to consider?

Like you, I see value in exploring different possibilities.

I should say one thing for the record, though. I disagree pretty strongly with the idea that our students are at risk of not learning how to incorporate substantive material into an analysis, such that the school is just a "gate to pass through," as you put it. A socratic conversation in class, for example, is precisely an occasion for students to offer this sort of analysis orally. Those of us who have taught at the School for a number of years can tell you that we certainly do see students become increasingly comfortable with this set of intellectual challenges over the course of their years with us. There also is a parallel phenomenon in which people often see their grades improve as well. This is not to say we can't do an even better job at training people -- that should always be our ambition -- but my sense (and, I should add, the sense of those who hire Columbia Law students) is more positive than perhaps you are suggesting about where we are now.

Thanks again for writing to me about this.

Best,

DS

Any thoughts/comments? I'm going to try to respond by the end of the day, but any input would be helpful.

-- JaredMiller - 26 Jun 2012