Article Reviews | Institute for Law Teaching and Learning

ChatGPT Exercise in the LRW Class

13FebFebruary 14, 2023 By Vicky Daniels

By Sandra Simpson, Professor Gonzaga University School of Law

Professor, Ashley B. Armstrong of the University of Connecticut School of Law has written a draft article examining artificial intelligence known as ChatGPT and exploring its implications for legal writing classrooms. This draft is titled Who’s Afraid of ChatGPT? An Examination of ChatGPT’s Implications for Legal Writing can be found at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4336929. This artificial intelligence is different because it creates content for the requester, including attorneys and law students.

After reading Ashley’s draft, I reached out to her to discuss this new resource. She provided the assignment laid out below for me to use in my classroom. The power of this assignment is that it provides a way for LRW professors to have open discussions with our students about the ethical use of artificial intelligence as a student and as a professional.

Classroom Assignment

TO:              Associates
FROM:       Ashley Binetti Armstrong
DATE:        January 24, 2023
RE:              ChatGPT

On November 30, 2022, OpenAI launched ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer). ChatGPT is an Artificial Intelligence interface that can generate human-like text in response to user queries. I would like you to test and analyze how ChatGPT performs on a series of legal research and writing tasks. I also would like to know what concerns ChatGPT might raise related to attorney ethics. Please complete the activities described and respond to the questions below.

1. Insert the following prompt into ChatGPT:

Write a legal memo based on the following facts and questions: We have a new client, Priyanka Patel. Patel was recently involved in a swimming accident at the Ellenbosch estate in Blueridge, CT. This remote Estate is owned by Caroline Ellenbosch and features a large lake, trails, playground, and cliffs known to be great for rock climbing. I briefly interviewed Patel this afternoon. She has a lot of expenses related to the injuries she suffered, and we need to figure out if she has grounds to sue the landowner. I am not sure if this is possible, and I would like you to investigate whether Ellenbosch has landowner immunity. Limit your research to Connecticut law. You may use unreported cases. Use proper Bluebook citation form and office memo format. Facts: On September 4, 2022, around 12pm Patel drove to the Estate. She paid a $10 parking fee to park onsite. On her climb, Patel passed at least two signs that warned against use of the lake and against swimming/diving. When she reached the summit, she dove into the lake and landed in a shallow spot. She broke her right leg and fractured her tailbone. The parking lot is owned by Ellenbosch and considered part of the estate. She charges a $10 fee per car to park in the lot. There are some free parking spots on the street, “but they are too far away for it to be worth it. Parking on site is so much more convenient, obviously.” Patel estimates that the free street parking is about .5 miles from the site. Terrain is uneven, uphill, no crosswalks, no sidewalks that she recalls. There is a small bike rack on site. There is no public transportation to the property. It seems like almost all visitors pay the parking fee.

2. Insert this prompt, next:

Can you provide a list of 10 other cases I should review?

3. Insert this prompt, next:

Using the cases from the previous response, please write a legal argument for Patel’s case, following the CREAC structure.

4. Using Westlaw or Lexis, look up the cases that ChatGPT provided in its responses. More specifically, if ChatGPT provided the following case “Czepiga v. Town of Manchester, 884 A.2d 1202 (Conn. 2005),” please tell me a) whether any case by that name exists on Westlaw/Lexis; and b) what result you get when you search for “884 A.2d 1202.” Include the list of cases and answers to questions a and b, below.

5. If ChatGPT provided any statutes, or any other sources in its responses, please look those up on Westlaw or Lexis. List the source and what the source is about (e.g., title of the statute and a 1-2 sentence summary), below.

6. Describe any observations about ChatGPT’s response to question 1, above. Consider: the accuracy of the response (researching on Lexis or Westlaw), the structure of the response (compared to what you’ve learned about successful legal writing), and anything else you would like to note.

7. Describe any observations about ChatGPT’s response to question 3, above. Consider: the accuracy of the response (researching on Lexis or Westlaw), the structure of the response (compared to what you’ve learned about successful legal writing in this course), and anything else you would like to note.

8. Please provide a short (~2-4 sentence) summary of the following Model Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.1, 1.3, 2.1, 3.3, and 4.1. You should review the text of the rule and the comments to the rule.

9. What concerns about rules 1.1, 1.3, 2.1, 3.3, and 4.1 might be raised when attorneys use ChatGPT?

10. Please provide a short (~2-4 sentence) summary of Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6. You should review the text of the rule and the comments to the rule.

11. What concerns about rule 1.6 might be raised if attorneys use ChatGPT? Under what circumstances?

My Classroom Assignment Reflection

We spent all 70 minutes of class working our way through the ChatGPT exercise provided by Ashley Armstrong in her draft article and the assignment above. I started by asking the class what AI they use regularly. I made it clear to the students that I was not judging them, but rather was curious about what they are using. This opened up an honest discussion about artificial intelligence. The students were only using Grammarly, Spell Check, brief checkers, etc., but not using any product that is producing original work like ChatGPT. That conversation was really interesting.

Then we got into ChatGPT and the worksheet. I had them work in groups and report out. They were particularly shocked by how bad the AI writing was and how much better they felt about their emerging skills. I then had them do the original research that was assigned to the ChatGPT in the assignment. Many forgot how to come up with original search terms, limit their jurisdiction, etc. Thus, we backed up and reviewed the research process. Though this was a bit of a surprise to me, it was good to get that feedback and good to help them review the research skills. Once they finished the research, they were mortified at how wrong the AI was. Again, they felt pretty good about their research skills compared to the computer.

After that, I assigned one MRPC to each team to look up, review, and discuss how ChatGPT implicates the rules. (I had the groups read the rule and the comments). The students really engaged in this part of the discussion. They learned the MRPC while applying them to using AI in their practice. Many of the rules were surprising to them, such as, most students had never considered that posting or entering client data into an internet resource would be a breach of confidentiality. (It’s a whole new world)

The last thing we did was discuss what our class would like to do with this type of tech going forward. They universally agreed that ChatGPT was so wrong that it is dangerous to use, and that it would take more time to check its work than just do the work themselves. They said they would like to see how ChatGPT does with the projects we work on this semester. I am not sure what that looks like going forward, but we are going to start by feeding their fall final research assignment prompt into the AI and see what ChatGPT comes up with. It should be noted that I read an article that Westlaw and Lexis are looking to partner with ChatGPT so it has access to the database. Oh boy. The students were interested to see where this goes.

At the end of the class, we agreed that their work must be their own. If they want to use their resources in tandem with other sources such as this (just like using a secondary source) that is up to them, but they are responsible for the end product and its accuracy.

I am pretending I know what this looks like in the end, but for now, it felt good to talk about it. The key here is getting ahead of it rather than reacting to it.

Moving Forward

If any of this listserv’s readers decide to use this assignment, please let Ashley Armstrong know what your class did and your reflections. We are facing this new technology together!

Review: Strategies & Techniques for Integrating DEI into the Core Law Curriculum…

07SepSeptember 7, 2021 By Vicky Daniels

Review by Emily Grant, Washburn University School of Law.

Professor Teri McMurtry-Chubb once again steps into a gap to provide much-needed information, suggestions, and resources for the law teaching community. This time, she has written a book about incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) into all of our classrooms.

Strategies & Techniques for Integrating DEI into the Core Law Curriculum: A Comprehensive Guide to DEI Pedagogy, Course Planning, and Classroom Practice by Teri McMurtry-Chubb is available for free download here: https://www.wklegaledu.com/resources/law-school-faculty/law-school-faculty

The book features DEI learning outcomes and assessments, course planning templates for each course in the core law curriculum, and racial trauma-informed teaching approaches. It also includes FAQs and discussion questions by chapter to work through as you and your colleagues plan and implement DEI curricular initiatives at your law school. The book is organized in three main parts, as described in the Introduction:

Part I, Chapter 1, The Scope of DEI Education & Pedagogy details the evolution of teaching with a DEI lens. DEI education and pedagogy work to make the greatest positive change within the core structures of legal education by strategically employing critical pedagogies and curricula. Chapter 2, The First Amendment, Academic Freedom, and the DEI Curricular Lens, examines the pushback students, faculty, and administration have encountered when advocating for DEI pedagogical and curricular interventions. This pushback has been cast as a conflict around academic freedom. This chapter discusses the current conflicts in the battle between DEI and academic freedom, and provides strategies for how to navigate these issues on law school campuses. Chapter 3, Assessing the Institutional Climate for DEI Curricula, explores the varied considerations professors of all ranks and statuses (e.g., Assistant, Associate, and Full Professors, non-tenure-track full-time faculty; adjunct faculty, etc.) should make when implementing DEI issues into the classroom and curriculum. This chapter explores how rank, status, and campus climate influence which pedagogical and curricular choices are available to faculty. It also examines professor positionality and teaching, or how a professor “presents” to the class impacts available DEI curricular choices and pedagogical strategies.

Part II, Chapter 4, Racial Trauma Informed Approaches to DEI Pedagogy, discusses how microaggressions, macroaggressions, and other discriminatory practices leave an indelible mark on those who have survived them. The psychological and social science communities have examined these phenomena as trauma, and have detailed the emotional, psychological, and physical effects they have on minoritized groups. It is imperative that professors have an understanding of racial trauma and racial trauma informed pedagogies as they prepare to discuss DEI issues in the classroom and design DEI curricula. Chapter 5, Course Planning and Assessment for the DEI Classroom & Curriculum, provides instruction on how to build a course that integrates a DEI curricular lens. It offers course planning templates that link skills and knowledge to learning outcomes, performance criteria, and learning activities – both for traditional and online classroom environments. It also connects the information in Chapter 4: Racial Trauma Informed Approaches to DEI Pedagogy to the course planning and assessment processes. Chapter 6, Developing Instructional Materials for DEI Pedagogy & Practice, lays out the processes for developing classroom DEI instructional materials that serve as learning activities to advance and measure learning outcomes. The chapter surveys multimedia resources, traditional learning techniques, microlearning techniques, and the like that are appropriate for traditional and online learning environments. It also provides levels of difficulty (easy, intermediate, difficult, and advanced) at which professors can access this work.

Answers to a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) is located in Chapter 7. If you are working through this book with a committee, faculty, or other group, Chapter 7 also provides discussion questions for Chapters 1-6 to facilitate group dialogue. Lastly, Part III, Chapters 8-14, provides examples of course planning, instructional materials, and assessment for core curriculum courses at the easy, intermediate, and difficult levels. The courses included are Contracts, Civil Procedure, Criminal Law, Property, Constitutional Law, Legal Writing, and Torts.

Formative Assessment in Doctrinal Classes: Rethinking Grade Appeals

02SepSeptember 2, 2020 By Vicky Daniels

Reviewed by Sandra Simpson, Gonzaga University School of Law

Article: Formative Assessment in Doctrinal Classes: Rethinking Grade Appeals

Written by: Professor Roberto Corrada, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Published: Journal of Legal Education, Volume 63, Number 2 (November 2013)

In this article, Professor Corrada makes a compelling case for allowing students to appeal their grade on the mid-term exam. Professor Corrada realized that creating long and detailed rubrics for exams was not helpful if students never reviewed them. To give them an incentive to review his exam comments, he began giving a mid-term exam, which, he reasoned would encourage students to look at the feedback. He noted when students came to review their exams with him, many of them had good arguments and probably deserved a better grade. He felt that he demanded excellence from his students and so shouldn’t he demand that of himself. The idea of allowing students to appeal their midterm grade was his solution. If the students had a chance to appeal, they might glean more from the review of their midterm.

In developing this idea, he came up with a system which is both efficient and workable. His appeal rate is about 70%, and he believes almost every student reviews his/her/their exam. Among the many advantages he has found is that it encourages students to think critically about what they are writing and to question assumptions. Further, through explanation students often realize they don’t write what they mean; learning to fix this common error is key to a successful law practice.

The article addresses concerns including the extra time this process takes (which is not as much as one might expect) and gives the reader a step-by-step guide to implementing this appeals process.

Review: The Deconstructed Issue-Spotting Exam

12FebFebruary 12, 2020 By Sandra Simpson

By Jeremiah A. Ho, University of Massachusetts School of Law

Jamie R. Abrams, The Deconstructed Issue-Spotting Exam, 68 J. Legal Educ. 194 (2019).

Professor Jamie Abrams from University of Louisville has recently published an article in the Journal of Legal Education with an innovative technique for exam preparation, formative assessment, and lawyering simulation all through what she calls the “deconstructed exam.” In her piece, The Deconstructed Issue-Spotting Exam, she uses the exam review opportunity in a large case-method class not only for its formative assessment purposes, but also for facilitating more comprehensive curricular reforms that today’s law schools are implementing—particularly in the area of developing lawyering competencies.

Abrams’ approach begins with the use of a traditional issue-spotting cumulative essay. Once administered and then reviewed with students for legal analysis and issue-spotting skills, Abrams suggests extending the opportunity for further instruction based off the same fact pattern. Abrams recommends using the exam to further the student’s ability to redo the exam from a client-centered perspective. This approach is handled particularly by “invit[ing] students to explain why rules are as they are, to provide context for how a rule developed to be what it is, to highlight whether claims are strong or weak, to put issues in procedural context, and to anticipate client reactions.” Her article details a step-by-step guideline that lays out how her approach is accomplished.

For those of us who teach large Socratic courses, Abrams’ approach may sound ambitious at the start—and it is! However, her article is precisely written and her approach is very well calculated. Overall, her approach takes the large fact patterns that we spend days (or weeks) to write for our students and imbues it with more than just its customary finite purpose in the exam room and for grading. Rather it repurposes the traditional law school exam from its goals for formative assessments to effectuating larger professional competencies within our students. Abrams gives us a new thoughtful approach to law school testing that imparts more usefulness for both faculty and students.

Review: Office Hours Are Not Obsolete: Fostering Learning Through One-on-One Student Meetings

12NovNovember 12, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

By Tonya Krause-Phelan, WMU-Cooley Law School

Office Hours Are Not Obsolete: Fostering Learning Through One-on-One Student Meetings
By DeShun Harris
57 Duquesne Law Review 43 (Winter, 2019)

In her article Office Hours Are Not Obsolete: Fostering Learning Through One-on-One Student Meetings, Professor DeShun Harris encourages professors to rethink how they use office appointments to enhance student learning. Professor Harris addresses the current notion that technology has reduced, if not eliminated, the need for in-person office hours. While research shows that students tend to typically underuse, or even avoid altogether, the in-person office appointment, professors can overcome students’ perception that office meetings are not worth their time. Because one-on-one meetings provide rich learning opportunities, improve student performance on assessments, and potentially improve grades, legal educators should use effective learning strategies, many of which are being integrated into law school classrooms, to provide students with one-on-one learning opportunities during office hours.

Using strategies to encourage office meetings, professors can overcome the underutilization of office hours. One common misperception students have is that faculty are unavailable or not interested in hosting office meetings; consequently, professors must explain why one-on-one office meetings are important to students. Professors can convey a message through an invitation to attend office hours in the course syllabus; the message can be reinforced during the first class and before and after assessments during subsequent classes.

Once students decide to attend an office meeting, professors must create a welcoming office setting. Doing so conveys a message that the professor is available and does not think the meeting is an interruption. Things to consider when creating a suitable office atmosphere are ease in scheduling the meeting, an uncluttered office, a blank computer screen, and arranging furniture in a way that does not form barriers between the student and the professor.

The student meeting itself should be structured according to the common office hour framework. While there has been little research in the law school setting, Professor Harris points to research conducted at German universities where it was noted that most one-on-one conferences take on a five-sequenced framework. First, the prefacing sequence, involves inviting the student into the office; this can be done by general invitation or a specific request for the student to meet with the professor. The invitation must be extended in a way that is non-threatening. Second, the identification sequence is typically the beginning of the meeting, where the professor greets the student and engages in small talk. Flowing naturally from the identification sequence, the third sequence is outlining the academic business the student wishes to discuss. This sequence should be task-oriented to address the student’s concern/goals. Once the academic business has been outlined, the professor and student can move to the fourth sequence is negotiating academic business sequence. Here, the professor guides the student to a solution. Attention should be paid to writing, thought processing, and behavior that can lead to academic and career success. In working toward a solution, the professor is encouraged to use research on learning science to foster student learning. The fifth and final sequence is the closing sequence. Here, the solution is acknowledged.

Finally, professors must use effective learning methods to create a learner-centered meeting. One method professors can use is retrieval, the act of trying to recall information once learned from memory. Retrieving information is a powerful way to retain information because it strengthens the memory and association with the material, even when students give wrong answers. Another effective learning strategy to use in the office meeting setting is problem-solving. Professors can ask students to answer something that is new to them; then the student explains their thought process in reaching the answer. This also allows professors to give constructive feedback. As a way to aid students in becoming self-regulated learners, professors can also discuss professional development concepts like training, self-study, critical reflection, and feedback.

Professor Harris concludes that office hours are not obsolete. Instead, office hours should be encouraged as they provide important learning opportunities for students. Professors can easily modify the manner in which they currently host office appointments and incorporate effective learning strategies, many of which are being integrated into law school classrooms, to provide students with one-on-one opportunities designed to enhance their knowledges, skills and education.

Review: Teaching Controversial Topics

02OctOctober 2, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

Reviewed by Jane Korn, Gonzaga University School of Law

Article: Teaching Controversial Topics [1]
Written by Beth Burkstand-Reid, June Carbone, and Jennifer S. Hendricks

In the highly politicized climate, it seemed especially appropriate to look for advice on teaching controversial topics. While the article reviewed is in the context of a family law course, almost any course can have controversial topics. I teach both Civil Procedure and Employment Discrimination and while there are more minefields in Employment Discrimination, Civil Procedure has a few.

The authors first explore what controversial topic is and they indicate that this includes those that are heavily politicized and note that these areas often promote rigidity in thinking. Controversy can also arise when topics are personalized by students, either by personal experience or because of a lack of diversity in the classroom. While some diversity is noticeable, other types may not be known to the professor such as sexual orientation or some disabilities.

It is important to lay the groundwork before the first class or even before. A course description can set the expectation for prospective students in your class. For example, you can indicate the wide range of topics you will be covering which should put students on notice that there will be controversial topics covered. The authors also suggest that if you want to market the class more narrowly, you can state that a certain position is the starting point rather than a matter for debate. You can also lay the groundwork during the first class. The authors caution that dictatorial control can backfire but that laying expectations can aid discussion without chilling all debate

The article lays out three strategies for expected controversy:

Learning who stands for what – deciding who in the classroom advocates for which position. Sometimes an outside speaker or colleague is helpful to present a viewpoint. You can also take blind surveys to find out various positions on anticipated controversial topics to gauge the varying positions.
Using media and pop culture to bring in what otherwise may be marginalized views. This can also reduce tension through humor. Historical versions of pop culture can also provide context and background.
Shifting ground by blunting controversy by confronting it obliquely. One way to accomplish this is to shift the discussion away from what side is right to what arguments can be made.

No matter what we teach, there will be controversy. The authors note that we must recognize that what worked in one class during one semester may not work in another. The toolbox of techniques suggested by the authors is a welcome resource for dealing with the difficult issue of covering controversial topics in the classroom.

[1] Beth Burkstand-Reid, June Carbone, and Jennifer S. Hendricks, Teaching Controversial Topics, 49 Fam. Ct. Rev. 678 (2011)

Review: Teaching Online Will Make You a Better Teacher in Any Setting

25SepSeptember 25, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

Reviewed by Sandra Simpson, Gonzaga University School of Law

Article: Teaching Online Will Make You a Better Teacher in Any Setting [1]

Written by Kevin Gannon [2]

Published in The Chronicle of Higher Education

The article, “Teaching Online Will Make You a Better Teacher in Any Setting,” is a great article which highlights how pushing ourselves to teach in another setting will make us a better teacher. Here the other setting is a completely different setting. Professor Gannon makes it clear that online teaching is not where good teaching goes to die, but quite the opposite. He makes the point that “teaching in another setting forces you to “critique and modify, or affirm and expand, the way you operate in the physical classroom.” Specifically, online teaching, he says, helps you design and assess the course more effectively; helps you really think about why you spend time on what you do; and prompts you to explain/communicate more effectively in all your courses. This is a motivating piece which has moved to the forefront of importance due to the ever-expanding online offerings at all out schools.

[1] The article can be found here https://www.chronicle.com/article/Teaching-Online-Will-Make-You/247031?cid=wcontentgrid_hp_9

[2] Professor Gannon is a Professor of History, Director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at Grand View University in Des Moines, Iowa.

Review: Normalizing Struggle

26JunJune 26, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

Reviewed by Sandra Simpson, Gonzaga University School of Law

Article: Normalizing Struggle[1]

Written by Catherine Martin Christopher
Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Bar Success, Texas Tech University School of Law

In this article, Professor Christopher makes an excellent argument for normalizing and even celebrating our students’ struggle to acquire, retain, and apply the information taught in law school. She encourages us not to see our students’ struggle as a problem and but rather asks us to “reorient our attitudes toward the struggle.” Not only will this help our students learn and retain knowledge better but it will help our students be better equipped to handle the stressors of being a lawyer.

The article starts with examining how our current system conflates struggle with failure, which marginalizes our students, and continues by discussing how pervasive the struggles are among our students. Part III teaches us how to reframe the struggle to being productive, and Part IV gives us some best practices to help students to work with their struggles. Lastly, the article ends with encouraging the institution as a whole to normalize and encourage the struggle. Even though I consider myself fairly well-read when it comes to assessment and teaching techniques, I found a plethora of new articles to read in the article’s footnotes. What is more, I found some great ideas to incorporate into my classes this fall. These ideas ranged from good topics for first day discussions with students to good ways to implement information retention strategies. One of my favorite parts of this article paints an image of an elementary student standing in front of a chalkboard with chalk in her hand unable to solve the problem on the board. She is in front of everyone. The teacher, not wanting her student to be humiliated, has the child sit down and calls another child up to solve the problem. Professor Christopher asks the thought-provoking question of “what if it wasn’t embarrassing to not have the right answer?” To me this is a mind-blowing concept, and yet it is so simple. What if we helped the student solve the problem by embracing the student’s struggle? I am inspired, and the article gives me the tools to do this! Don’t let the 33 pages of this article scare you away from reading it. The time slips by quickly and the ideas are abundant.

[1] Forthcoming in the Arkansas Law Review 2019 but can be accessed at SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3378829

Racial Anxiety

31MarApril 8, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

By Anastasia M. Boles, UA Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law

As law professors, we care deeply about our students. We put a tremendous amount of effort into our teaching, advising student organizations, and serving as formal and informal mentors. Unfortunately, science has taught us that unconscious racism may be operating to degrade our student interactions. Many of us are familiar with the term “implicit bias.” Over the last few decades, social psychologists have explored the ways implicit preferences and biases permeate society, including criminal justice, health, and education. Thus, unconscious racism may be interfering with our student interactions.

While lesser known than implicit bias, a common consequence of unconscious racism is “racial anxiety,” which is the unconscious anxiety we may experience or exhibit when interacting with a person of a different race. For example, racial anxiety can cause undetectable physical changes in our bodies such as nervousness, discomfort, stiffness, and decreased eye contact. The experience of unconscious racial anxiety sets up a vicious cycle; we unconsciously minimize interactions that have made us uncomfortable in the past, even if we cannot name the source of the discomfort. Racial anxiety expresses differently depending on race – people of color may be anxious about experiencing racism; whites may fear saying the wrong thing, or being labeled a racist. Whatever the cause, as our cognitive resources are directed to mitigating any racial anxiety we are experiencing, the quality of our personal interaction with the differently-raced person can degrade.[1]

Racial anxiety is likely present in the halls and classrooms of law schools as well. Despite our best intentions, law professors may experience racial anxiety symptoms in cross-racial conservations and interactions with our students. At the same time, our differently-raced students may experience racial anxiety as they interact with us. Consider this common scenario: a white law professor and a student of color meet outside of class for the first time to review an exam, talk about an issue from class, or discuss a paper. Racial anxiety can affect the professor’s ability to build rapport with the student, appear open and friendly, evaluate the student’s learning needs, engage the student’s questions, and build trust. The student of color, if also affected by racial anxiety, is less able to ask questions, absorb feedback, and seek mentoring. If either the law professor or law student experienced unconscious racial anxiety during the meeting, future interactions between the professor and student may be affected. Now imagine the potential for racial anxiety to disrupt the law school classroom where a sensitive issue related to race comes up in class discussion. Racial anxiety may degrade the ability or willingness of the professor to engage the issue. The ensuring student discussion could suffer. Our students require our full attention; if racial anxiety is depleting the attention we give, we should do something about it.

What can we do? If racial anxiety operates in our unconscious minds, can we ever hope to banish it? The great news is that we can. To combat racial anxiety, psychologists recommend that we start by increasing our cross-racial interactions with our students. Psychologists call this “intergroup contact.” Strategies such as encouraging students to attend office hours to increase familiarity, attending and supporting student events with differently-raced students, and increasing the amount and depth of conversations with differently-raced students can help. During cross-racial interactions, seek to understand cultural differences as well as identifying similarities; the goal is to recognize and appreciate the varying cultural backgrounds of our students – not minimize them. The more law teachers and law students from different racial backgrounds interact with one another, the less potential for racial anxiety to disrupt those interactions.

[1] For more information about racial anxiety see here, and here.

The Compounding Effects of Assessment

21MarMarch 21, 2019 By Sandra Simpson

By Lindsey P. Gustafson, UA Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law

If you’ve found your way to the Institute of Law Teaching and Learning, you are likely already a believer in formative assessment. We do have empirical evidence that formative assessment improves student learning in law: Two recent studies have shown that students who received individualized feedback during the semester outperformed students who did not on final exams, and not just in the class where they received the feedback but in every single class they were taking.^[1] One study’s authors note the “likelihood of this occurring by chance is one in 256.”^[2]

But as we add formative assessments to students’ semesters, we must consider how we are altering the demands on their time. The middle of the semesters, which have traditionally been the playground for the Socratic Method and for legal writing assignments, may now be filled with a variety of assessment activities, and some of them may dominate students’ time in a way that impacts students’ learning in other classes. When our assessments interfere with students’ participation in other classes, or vice versa, the inferences that we draw from our assessments about student learning may not be valid. And an assessment that provides invalid data is worse than no assessment at all. Consequently, we must all consider our assessments as students experience them, “holistically and interactively.”^[3]

How do we deeply coordinate assessments and avoid an assessment system that instead overwhelms students, clutters or fragments their learning, or discourages them early in their first semester? We must coordinate beyond shared calendars, starting in our own classrooms by ensuring that our own assessment activities, as a slice of the student-time pie, are designed with and justified by best practices that encourage an assessment’s validity. In a recent article, I’ve identified five relevant best practices:

Make the assessments’ alignment with learning goals transparent to students and to other faculty members with whom we intend to coordinate: A clear alignment with learning goals helps students understand how the assessments will move them towards learning goals, and helps them make informed decisions about their allocation of time. A clear alignment also allows us to clearly communicate our assessment choices to other faculty members.
Use rubrics to create a shared language of instruction: Once we identify learning goals, rubrics help us refine our communication with students. They see how they will be assessed, and we see with specificity what they have learned.
Ensure the assessments encourage student autonomy: One particularly harmful potential outcome of a tightly orchestrated assessment system is that it may overly dictate student decisions, rather than facilitate student autonomy. Our assessment systems should build students’ feelings of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, which are fundamental to learning.
Set high expectations and display confidence that students can meet those expectations: Students prone to maladaptive responses to feedback are likely to be overwhelmed and discouraged by frequent assessments. Explaining our high expectations and displaying confidence in students can help address these tendencies.
Regularly review the entire assessment system, paying particular attention to students’ ownership of their own learning within the system.

When we ground our formative assessment decisions in best practices, we are better able to communicate our decisions to students, and better able to more deeply coordinate with other faculty members.

[1] See Daniel Schwarcz & Dion Farganis, The Impact of Individualized Feedback on Law Student Performance, 67 J. Legal Educ. 139, 142 (2017) (finding that formative assessment improved performance on final exams for students with below-median entering credientials); Ruth Colker et al., Formative Assessments: A Law School Case Study, 94 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 387 (2017) (finding the same); Carol Springer Sargent, Andrea A. Curcio, Empirical Evidence That Formative Assessments Improve Final Exams, 61 J. Legal Educ. 379, 383–84 (2012) (finding that formative assessment improved performance on final exams for students with above-median entering credentials); Andrea A. Curcio, Gregory Todd Jones & Tanya M. Washington, Developing an Empirical Model to Test Whether Required Writing Exercises or Other Changes in Large-Section Law Class Teaching Methodologies Result in Improved Exam Performance, 57 J. Legal Educ. 195, 197 (2007) (finding the same); Andrea A. Curcio, Gregory Todd Jones & Tanya M. Washington, Does Practice Make Perfect? An Empirical Examination of the Impact of Practice Essays on Essay Exam Performance, 35 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 271, 280-82, 302-306 (2008)(finding the same).

[2] Schwarcz, supra note 1, at 142.

[3] See Harry Torrance, Formative Assessment at the Crossroads: Conformative, Deformative and Transformative Assessment, 38 Oxford Rev. of Educ. 323, 334 (2012) (noting that “assessment is always formative, but not necessarily in a positive way”).