Law Teaching

Home / Archive by category "Law Teaching"
ChatGPT Exercise in the LRW Class

ChatGPT Exercise in the LRW Class

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!

Instructional Check-Ins To Surmount Trials And Tribulations Of The Pandemic In The Era Of Meta Connection

Instructional Check-Ins To Surmount Trials And Tribulations Of The Pandemic In The Era Of Meta Connection

By Vicky Daniels

By Lécia Vicente*, Henry Plauché Dart Endowed Assistant Professor of Law, LSU Paul M. Hebert Law Center

The Covid-19 pandemic threw us out of our game. It obligated us to change, readjust, compromise, quit, and reinvent ourselves in a new world where connection and communication are necessarily conducted at a meta level—online. However, there was one thing I maintained -regular and structured student check-ins. I ask my students to “check-in” by meeting with me at some point of their choosing during the semester. All students would plan to meet at least once during the semester, if only to let me know how things were going. These spaces for connection, reassurance, and validation became invaluable during the pandemic.

Connection is important. At a meta level, our relations are framed by dystopia and misconception of reality. Our relations are characterized by information overload. Very little sticks after the laptop is shut down and closed. Learning behind the screen makes it difficult to express our feelings or voice our questions.

Check-ins are an effective pedagogical tool which I have used for my doctrinal courses. I believe regular check-ins with built-in student group discussions can be useful in legal research and writing courses as well. These sessions allow me to meet students where they are and surmount some of the learning tribulations and challenges that they face behind the screen. I have been holding this format of office-hours in small groups. Students sign up for the meetings through a sign-up platform online where they can choose time slots of their preference. We meet via Zoom or in person, depending on the size of the group. During check-ins, students can interact not only with me but also with each other. It almost resembles a small discussion group to which I serve as a facilitator. I ask questions such as “What makes you learn better in this course?,” “What improvements would you like to see?,” and “How is law school going?”[†]

The conversational dynamic of the group creates an opportunity for my students to explore topics they are curious about. Some questions relate to the course materials and subject-matter. Others relate to their professor’s profile and choices she made when she was in their position, pursuing her law degree. Some of their common questions are: “How did you learn to speak six languages?” “What was it like to work with multinational companies with subsidiaries in Europe?,” and “Why did you want to become a law professor?” I facilitate dialogue that is deep, humane, and relatable. This conversation allows me to understand what helps my students learn better, what they are eager to learn, what is meaningful for them, and what is needed to build a relationship beyond the meta connection that the pandemic has imposed on us.

After each meeting, I process the students’ comments, questions, and instructional concerns. The results in my business law courses have been overwhelmingly positive, despite the pandemic and the challenges inherent to it for both students and professors. Regular, structured student check-ins have become a great source of feedback. Additionally, check-ins also provide a layout for meaningful connections which are essential for excellent learning outcomes.

[*] Henry Plauché Dart Endowed Assistant Professor of Law, Louisiana State University Paul M. Hebert Law Center. Research Fellow, Law & Economics Center at George Mason Antonin Scalia Law School.

[†] See Gregory S. Munro, Outcomes Assessment for Law Schools (2000). Available at: https://www.law.du.edu/documents/assessment-conference/munro-gregory-outcomesassessment2000.pdf (accessed on November 11, 2021).

Writing Case Briefs

Writing Case Briefs

By Vicky Daniels

By Professor Andrew Henderson, Australian National University.

Writing case briefs (or case notes as they are called in Australia) is a common form of assessment in law school, especially with first-year law students, as a way of exposing them to basic legal research, writing, and thinking skills before moving on to substantive subjects.  More importantly, the preparation of a case brief is usually the first taste first-year law students have of reading case law and identifying the holding (something that’s called the ratio decidendi in Australian law schools). It is also a common piece of legal research writing both in legal practice and in academia.

But my experience of teaching and marking case note writing, and informal discussions with students, indicate that they have consistently struggled with the case brief assessment – particularly with the identification and explanation of the holding.

A few years ago, I decided to go back to fundamentals in planning how to teach case brief writing. But rather than starting with the activity itself, I started with some basic principles of lesson design and planning.

Establishing the playing field

Unlike the United States, an LLB is the most common method of entry to the legal profession in Australia.  There are prescribed learning outcomes associated with the degree as a whole, and individual units within the degree, that are determined nationally by the Council of Australian Law Deans (the Teaching and Learning Outcomes (TLOs) for LLB students) and the Law Admissions Consultative Committee.  However, like American law schools, each unit also has learning outcomes approved by the Dean of each faculty. Some universities also have a set of graduate attributes applicable to all units offered on campus.

Good curriculum and instructional design mean that each of these sets of requirements should be aligned within a unit or course and reflected in assessment as a way of demonstrating that an individual law student has been assessed against accepted expectations.

If we had to picture that hierarchy in an Australian law school for a case brief assessment, it might look something like this:

Identifying the players

But just identifying the requirements isn’t enough. We also need to think about the law students that we will be working with. That is going to include things like the size of the group, their age, their educational experience so far, and their current level of confidence.

Each of these things is going to be critically important to the design of the lessons. For example, the majority of first-year law students in Australia tend to fall within what identify as a period in social and cognitive growth associated with ‘young adulthood’.  Studies of learning at this stage suggest that students at this stage struggle with ambiguity and assume that there is one right answer according to what lecturers or tutors tell them.

In writing a case brief, that’s important. There is rarely one correct version of the holding and one correct way to set out a case brief.  Explaining that there may be different ways of expressing the holding, and in fact that an important part of advocacy is to argue for a particular interpretation, is difficult and at this stage, ambiguity needs to be de-emphasized until the basic skills are established.

Planning the play

Despite case briefs being endemic to legal study, surprisingly there is no consistent or single method in how to teach or write one.  Frustratingly for students, there is no pro forma or precedent for presenting it.

However, where the skill being introduced is entirely new to the learners, there is a need to provide more active support and direction initially before providing opportunities for practice.  That means providing very structured explanations initially as a means of building – scaffolding – students to take an increasingly independent role.  Rather than just explaining what a case brief looks like, I write one in class, explaining what I am doing as I work through the decision. In a series of planned steps, I begin to hand over responsibility for the task to students, moving ultimately to getting students to work independently.

So what does it look like? My planning for the series of lessons looks like this:

Does it work?

Law students I have worked with, after stepping through this series of lessons, have generally expressed more confidence and performed well in case brief writing. Just as importantly, they have demonstrated much more confidence at the end of the process in tackling the process of reading cases.

What do you think? Is it worth a try in your law school classroom? Could it be improved?

 

Précis

Précis

By Vicky Daniels

This teaching idea comes to you from the directors of ILTL [1]

Précis

Précis is a French word, pronounced pray-see, that refers to a way of summarizing text to include the meaning of the original text but to be as concise as possible. It can be an effective tool to solidify understanding of a particular document, and it could be used a couple of different ways in a law school setting.

Often, in thinking about legal briefs or memos, experts talk about a topic sentence outline—making sure the topic sentence of each individual paragraph flows in a cohesive argument throughout the document.  The exercise of condensing each paragraph to just one topic sentence is a version of précis.

Students could use this technique to more deeply understand a case opinion as well.  Number the paragraphs of an assigned opinion, and have students create a précis.  Essentially, they will be writing a topic sentence for each paragraph of the judicial opinion in their own words, except when the words used by the court are terms of art, then they should use those terms of art.  The goal is to essentially create a topic sentence outline of the opinion that would allow the reader to follow the full course of reasoning.  It’s not a summary; students should write in the voice of the court.

Important pieces of a précis:  Who is the actor?  What is the function of the paragraph? What is the substantive content of the paragraph? And then focus on conciseness—use clear, simple language and eliminate unnecessary words.

For example, a précis of the equal protection discussion in Loving v. Virginia might look something like this:

1 The Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia upheld the constitutionality of the State’s ban against interracial marriages because (1) preserving the racial integrity of its citizens was deemed to be a legitimate governmental purpose and (2) marriage traditionally lies within the sphere of state regulation rather than federal regulation.
2 The State argues that (1) the Equal Protection Clause does not apply because it was meant only to prohibit differential punishment based on race and (2) as a result, the Court should apply deferential rational basis review to the laws.
3 The mere fact of equal application does not remove a law from equal protection scrutiny; laws containing racial classifications must meet a very heavy burden of justification.
4 The legislative history surrounding adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment does not clearly support the contention that it was meant to address only criminal laws that imposed differential punishment on the basis of race.
5 Precedent to the contrary has been repudiated.
6 Laws, like this one, that rely on distinctions based on race, must be shown to be necessary to the accomplishment of some permissible state objective other than race discrimination itself.
7 The law is supported by no overriding legitimate purpose outside of racial discrimination itself.
8 Anti-miscegenation laws also violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
9 Marriage is a fundamental right which cannot be infringed upon based on racial classifications.

[1] Hat tip: Susannah Pollvogt, Associate Dean of Student Success, University of Arkansas School of Law

How to Use Formative Assessment Data to Tailor Teaching

How to Use Formative Assessment Data to Tailor Teaching

By Vicky Daniels

By: Cynthia M. Ho, Professor at Loyola University School of Law

The principle of using frequent (multiple times a class and every week) formative assessment data to tailor teaching underlies Click & Learn, a Civil Procedure teaching tool that I created with Professor Angela Upchurch and Professor Susan Gilles.  However, this approach works in any doctrinal class.

How Can Formative Assessment Data Help Teachers?

Formative assessment data can help you know what students have mastered.  Saved time can focus on tougher concepts and/or permit other activities such as group exercises.

Alternatively, if there are topics that a substantial number of students did not get (i.e., at least 20-25% wrong), class time can be used to improve understanding.

What Formative Assessment Data?

Data can be derived from both “objective” (i.e. MC and T/F) data and narrative (i.e., essay answer and discussion board posts) assessments.

Data can provide trends to inform your teaching.  “Objective” data is easiest to scan.  But even narrative data can be efficiently reviewed if you review a small sample.

A Word of Caution: The Need to Focus Students on Learning

Teachers know that the point of formative assessment is to help students learn.  To reinforce this focus, students should get full credit towards class participation for all timely and “professional” submissions (i.e., doing the entire assignment in more than 30 seconds).

Three Options to Tailor Class

Here’s an overview of three options to tailor class:

Type of Formative Assessment Example How much class tailoring +/-
1. In-class only In-class polling Minimal +  easiest to incorporate;

–  least tailoring
2. Outside class only (a) “Objective”

(b) Narrative

 Medium + more tailoring, no need to adjust “on the fly”

-no ability to tailor during class
3. Combo-in & outside Both of the above Maximum + maximum tailoring

– maximum prep time

In addition, here are the benefits of each type of assessment for tailoring how you teach class.

Type of Formative Assessment Example Goals
1.In-class only In-class polling -review of material just covered to ensure mastery

-emphasizes a point

– provides application practice

– changes the pace of class and maintains engagement
2. Outside class only (a) “Objective”

(b) Narrative

 -Objective questions with detailed explanation provide  feedback to help ensure the entire class has mastery o

-provides application practice
3. Combo-in & outside Both of the above -all of the above, plus long-term learning benefits

Now that you know the big picture, let’s dive into the details.

  1. In-Class Only

Here’s a few examples of how to use in-class polling.

In-class polling to recap material just discussed

One way to incorporate polling is to ask a question after introducing a concept.  So, for example, after discussing what is a trade secret (TS), a polling question could ask students to apply what they know.  The left shows slides introducing the concept whereas the right shows the polling question.

In-class polling to emphasize a point in the assigned reading

A polling question can emphasize an issue since students will remember something if they get it wrong.  Here is one example that reinforces an issue students otherwise often miss without a poll:

  1. Outside Class only

Data based on formative assessment outside class can also help tailor class time.

For topics where the data shows students are struggling, these can be handled in two ways.  First, the question can be displayed again in class to solicit discussion of the right (and wrong) answer, together with reasoning.

Here’s one example where the question students previously had trouble with is on the left, with the key Civil Procedure issue of 1331 subject matter jurisdiction is on the right:

Alternatively, a new application question can be posed in class that asks students to discuss the same concept, but in a new factual setting such as the following:

Isn’t it a waste of time to review issues in class if formative assessment provided an answer?

No!  Even after students read an explanation, they may need more reinforcement.  Students say they prefer to review tougher questions in class even after reading the explanation.

How do you use data from narrative assignments?

Class discussion can also be tailored based on sampled essay data.  For example, after reviewing a few essay answers from a Civil Procedure, class a slide addressing noted issues can help organize the in-class discussion as shown below:

  1. Combo – in and outside

The best way to tailor teaching involves combining the previously discussed approaches.  Basically, conduct formative assessment outside class and then use that data to focus class time on needed issues, including in-class polling. This seems to promote long-term learning; students studying for the bar often email with delight to note that they remember concepts studied two years ago.

Tailoring can be truly maximized with a flipped law class where students learn material before  class. Click & Learn enables faculty to easily do this.

Even without using a flipped class approach, the Combo approach still provides more polling benefits. How?  Let’s explore.

A new in-class polling question may use the same facts from an outside-class “objective” question but pose new answer choices.  These choices can focus on issues underlying wrong answers students previously chose but stated slightly differently. This is shown below:

Data from narrative answers can be used to create a new in-class polling question to assess the entire class and reveal to confused students that they are not alone.  Here’s one example:

Data from narrative answers can also be used to help students compare what is and is not a strong statement to include in an essay answer.  Here’s one example with answer choices from sampled student answers:

Now what?

If you want more info, check out [How to choose a Formative Assessment Platform] and/or slides from the related Summer 2021 Conference presentation are available here.

And, of course, the best way of learning is by doing.  So, hopefully you’re now inspired to do more with your own data using some of these techniques!

Training New Lawyers to Recognize and Confront Structural Violence

Training New Lawyers to Recognize and Confront Structural Violence

By Tina Medlock

By Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum, Associate Professor of Clinical Law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Director of the Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic and the Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights (CLIHHR). Continue Reading

Make Failure Flattering: Embracing Classroom Struggles, Creating Real World Successes

Make Failure Flattering: Embracing Classroom Struggles, Creating Real World Successes

By Sandra Simpson

By Maj Wolfgang S. Weber, U.S. Air Force Academy[1], Assistant Professor Of Law

To all my students, past, present, and future, please forgive me, I have something I need to get off my chest:  I enjoy seeing you fail in the classroom.   

Well, at least initially. 

As educators, we constantly reflect upon how we can make our class an academic journey worth taking. Sure, we could lecture till we’re blue in the face; but is that really as effective (or fun) as an interactive effort that helps students recognize their own strengths and weaknesses within the material?

When I first began teaching, I meticulously walked my students through every single lesson, “If you have a question please don’t hesitate to stop me and ask!” I never wanted to leave a rock unturned; I never wanted to leave the class with lingering inquiries. I would spend countless hours thinking about exactly what I would say each lesson. I felt a need to tell them everything.

Before long, however, I quickly came to two realizations:  1) even though I was covering all the material, they weren’t fully processing it; and 2) I was boring.  

I was failing. But as you may guess, I’m glad I did.

From my own classroom failures, I reflected deeply on my deficiencies as an educator. I thought about everything I was doing step by step. I spoke at length with my more seasoned colleagues. Soon, it became clear – I was robbing my students of the opportunity to fail. 

Failure is undoubtedly one of life’s best teachers. As we can all likely attest, many of our most profitable educational lessons, both in and out of the classroom, come from failure. Even the most gifted toddler will certainly fall before she learns to walk. In an academic setting, nothing speaks quite as loudly as unmasking a student’s own deficiencies. Of course, this is far easier said than done. In Tony Wagner’s book, Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change the World, Wagner points out that many traditional academic settings penalize students for failure and discourage them to take risk. Thus, as educators, creating an academic environment that teaches students through failure can be an uphill battle. 

The best solution? We must give them permission to fail.

In all my classes, I am constantly thinking about new ways to allow my students to experience failure. In my law class, throughout the semester every student is assigned the task of creating and presenting a different hypothetical legal scenario that they must then teach the class to analyze. In my negotiations class, at some point each student must negotiate with a classmate while the rest of the class observes. In both instances, I make it a point to not teach the students the applicable material beforehand.

On the day of, the students hesitantly make their way to the front of the classroom – visibly nervous about doing or saying something incorrectly in front of their peers; but before a word ever leaves a student’s mouth, I provide a preface to the class: 

Before Sidney and Graham begin, I want to quickly tell them both … ‘thank you.’ While each of them will undoubtedly do some things correctly, they will almost certainly also do some things incorrectly … they will fail. And that’s okay. While we learn in many different ways, one of the best ways to improve is learning from our failures. The Wright brothers didn’t build a flying plane on their first attempt, and none of us, including me, are likely to conduct perfect legal analysis on our first go.  

But the important thing is that we all have the courage to make that first attempt, and that we all are open-minded, tactful, and considerate in our criticisms. Let’s thrive together from an academic environment that lauds mistakes and embraces growth. Graham, Sidney – thank you both for being vulnerable in front of all of us today and giving us this chance to learn … please proceed.

As the students proceed, the class watches eagerly. By the end of the exhibition, I ask the students to take a seat, often receiving applause from their classmates without prompting. Then, I unapologetically ask the entire class the tough questions:  What did they do right? What did they do wrong, where did they fail? What could they have done better?

On most occasions, the students burst into an array of discussion, both complimenting and critiquing their peers with little reluctance; while their peers themselves anxiously receive the feedback, often following up with further questions about their own shortfalls. From there, I jump into the academic lesson, teaching the material while interweaving it with the student presentation and subsequent dialogue.

Over years of teaching through this method, the results have remained consistent: Nine times out of ten, students fail miserably during these exhibitions. Fall flat on their face. But then, the consequent transition transforms them as they ponder all the hidden lessons that did not initially come to mind. Lightbulbs start flashing above their heads as we discuss the new material. And by the end of the class, they’re smiling. They love it. Within an hour, they have gone from defeat to success. They have experienced growth before their very eyes and they’re better for it. By the end of the semester, student feedback repeatedly reiterates these exercises as class favorites.

ather than lecturing at them, consider creating an environment in which students can readily experience and reflect on their academic weaknesses safely. Set them up for failure in the classroom. Make it an ethos in your classroom by giving them permission to fail. You may find that the only thing more enjoyable … is knowing you prepared them for real world success. 

Review: The Deconstructed Issue-Spotting Exam

Review: The Deconstructed Issue-Spotting Exam

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.

Institute for Law Teaching and Learning