Uncategorized | Institute for Law Teaching and Learning

Using the Local News as the Basis for an In-class Exercise

04JanJanuary 11, 2022 By ILTL

By: Andrea Need, Indiana University O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs

This semester I interrupted my planned class (lecture, case discussion, and hypotheticals) with a simple mini case study exercise “ripped from the headlines” in our midwestern town.

Background: By class time, most students had heard the news that the City of Bloomington, IN had conducted a controlled live burn of a two-story house in a neighborhood not far from campus.[1] Such fire training burns are allowed, subject to conditions, as exceptions to state open burning prohibitions. Local news reported that immediately after the burn, neighbors complained of debris, including paint chips, on their houses and cars and in their yards and gardens. A resident’s test showed lead in the debris, which was later confirmed by the city.[2]

Exercise: Do we need to change the law after the controlled burn event? (25-30 minutes)

(10 minutes) First, I asked the students to read a news report and a city press release, which I linked on our course page for easy access.[3] I picked these two documents because they covered the background, discussed relevant laws, and could be read quickly.

I told the students to assume whatever these documents stated was true. For example, the press release stated that the city sought proper approval and complied with the state open burning law, which does not require lead testing.[4]

(5 minutes) I instructed students that once they were done reading, they were to break into small groups of three to five students each and discuss and write down any problems resulting from this event.
(5 minutes) We discussed the problems as a class and I wrote them on the board. Some problems were as follows:
- Is there lead contamination—particularly in gardens and where children play?
- Should lead testing be required prior to burning? Is accurate lead testing possible? Should we assume all buildings older than a certain year have lead paint?
- Even if no lead was present, the city caused ash to fall on people’s property.
- Is the required notice adequate or equitable (i.e., accessible)? What could a person do if they got notice and were concerned?
- Will the debris be removed and by whom? If so, how much will removing the debris cost?
- Should these burns occur farther from homes?
- Do firefighters need these opportunities to practice? Would too many testing or other requirements eliminate the training opportunities?
(5 minutes) Next, I asked if, based on what we know, the law needs to be changed and if so, how? At what level of government should the law be changed (state vs. local)? Or, I asked, was the law sufficient as-is, and was this an instance of a decision-making error? The class agreed the law needed to be amended because the burn was lawful but still problematic. Students shared ideas on changes to the law, which I wrote on the board. Some ideas were to:
- require lead testing prior to burning;
- prohibit burning structures built before lead paint was banned;
- require individual notice to all property owners within [xx distance determined by data collected on the impacted zone;
- prohibit burning within a certain distance of residences; and
- require a study on, and publication of, the costs of potential remediation.
(5 minutes) Finally, looking at the ideas on the board, I asked students to pick which one or two were the most important changes to the law and to explain why. Also, we discussed which problems that the students originally identified (in step 3) were addressed by the changes, and which remained.

As a result of our discussion, the students chose to require lead testing (if the building was built before a certain year, to be established based on the lead paint ban) and to require additional individual notice. The students rejected banning training burns altogether, or in certain areas because they did not know how important the training is for firefighters.
We acknowledged that actual legislative proposals would require research and much more detail.

Future Semesters: I plan to use this sort of mini case study again because: 1) adding something new to my usual in-class exercises livened up class, particularly later in the semester when enthusiasm was waning; 2) using a local legal issue meant the situation was easily understood and relatable for students; and 3) students were encouraged to think about tradeoffs in policy-making through the law. Several students approached me after class to tell me how much they enjoyed the exercise.

The next time I do this exercise, I will consider providing the open burning regulation and asking the students to markup amendments to the regulation.[5] At the end of future exercises, I will share the city’s ultimate conclusion that “no similar live-fire training should be conducted in the future.”[6] I will ask if this outcome satisfies the students.

You could expand this exercise by requiring research on other states’ open burning laws, the effectiveness of lead paint testing, firefighting training needs, etc., and then having groups of students present their proposals.

Applicability to Other Courses: I used this exercise in a public law course for graduate students pursuing their Master of Public Affairs. You could use this mini case study in a class on legislative drafting, environmental law or policy, or state and local government law. You could also modify the idea by keeping an eye out for a local news story covering the subject matter of your course, providing a bit more reading material on the topic or the relevant law, and asking the students the same sorts of questions.

[1] The burn and its aftermath are described in a series of press releases issued in November and December 2021, which can be found at https://bloomington.in.gov/news/2021. Only the first few press releases were available on class day.

[2] The contractor hired by the city determined that visible paint chips deposited were lead-based paint, but air samples exhibited no detection of lead, surface dust readings showed “non-excessive levels of lead dust contamination,” surface soil samples were below the lead action level, and leaf litter exhibited no lead detection. https://bloomington.in.gov/news/2021/12/13/5049.

[3] Press release: https://bloomington.in.gov/news/2021/11/10/5016; news story: https://fox59.com/news/residents-concerned-after-controlled-burn-exercise-in-bloomington-may-have-resulted-in-contaminated-ash-debris/.

[4] Here is the state approval: https://bloomington.in.gov/sites/default/files/2021-11/83218318.pdf.

[5] The regulations implementing the open burning exemptions are found at 326 IAC 4-1-3. Live fire training is addressed at 326 IAC 4-1-3(c)(9). Note that the press release cited in endnote 3 includes a map of affected properties. The affected properties’ distance from the burn site is particularly interesting in light of the notice requirements in 326 IAC 4-1-3(c)(9)(B).

[6] https://bloomington.in.gov/news/2021/12/13/5049.

Looking Beyond Headnotes: Distinguishing Cases (Exercise)

02NovNovember 2, 2021 By Vicky Daniels

By Matthew Boles,

Background

According to the ABA Student Lawyer magazine, unpaid internships, primarily in the summer between the first and second year, consists of research and writing.[1] More than 80 percent of the top 200 law schools indicate that legal research is a mandatory course for first-year students.[2] A 2013 Insights Report states associates spend nearly one-third of their time on legal research.[3] As students and lawyers research issues, headnotes can be a useful tool to read summaries of cases and find other similar cases.[4]

This exercise helps students look past the headnotes when reading cases and making arguments that courts should follow precedent or whether the case is distinguishable. I practice immigration law and use a four-page decision from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) as an example case. Students will read facts from a hypothetical scenario I created, read the decision and headnotes, and determine whether the headnote about a conviction for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) is sufficient.

Directions:

Have students read the “Overview of Client’s Case” section
Next, students will read the headnotes of the decision, Matter of Siniauskas,[5] take notes, and make a conclusion as to whether the case applies to our hypothetical situation, and if so, how. [Click here to access Matter of Siniauska (pdf)]
Read the case and determine whether the headnote about a DUI addressed the issue. I highlighted portions of the decision. I provide some information below as to why we do not cite headnotes in decisions.

Overview of Client’s Case

The attorney is an immigration lawyer and works at a small firm. She handles many types of immigration matters, from submitting petitions to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on a wide variety of matters, to representing immigrants who have court at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (“immigration court”). Up to this point, her work has been for immigrants who are not detained. As the firm grows, however, she begins taking cases where clients are detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The firm is contacted by a family whose family member is in an ICE facility about two hours from your office. The facts are below, but ICE files a Notice to Appear (form I-862) with the immigration court. The client’s family retains the firm to represent him in immigration court. The attorney files the Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Representative Before Immigration Court (form E-28) and completes the proof of service. She is prepared for his Master Calendar hearings, preliminary type of hearings, but understandably she wants to request a custody redetermination hearing (bond hearing) in hopes that her client will be released from ICE custody and have his case transferred to a non-detained docket.

Here are the facts of the client’s case. He is an immigrant whose sole entry to the United States was in 2005. He entered without inspection and has never applied for nor received any type of visa or lawful immigration status. In 2007, he meets a woman who he marries in 2010. His wife is a United States citizen. In 2012, she gives birth to their first child, a healthy baby boy. Three years later, they have their second child. This time they have a girl, and she has some health issues. He has a full-time job, working six days a week to support his family. He is the main source of financial support for his family. In addition to working, he and his family attend church every Sunday, and he is well-respected in the community.

One day after work, he and a couple of colleagues had a couple of drinks. He was driving home alone in his car when the police arrested him for a DUI. The DUI did not result in injuries or property damage. He pleaded guilty, received credit for time served, and paid the fine. A couple of days before he was scheduled for release, ICE placed an immigration detainer (immigration hold), and he was transferred to ICE custody. The DUI is his only criminal history (remember that immigration is civil, and not criminal. ICE is alleging he violated the Immigration and Nationality Act).

Since he has been detained, his family has struggled. His children, ages 9 and 6, are having trouble focusing at school. His wife had to find a second job and is constantly worried what will happen to her husband. The attorney has already collected letters of support from friends, family members, the church, and other relevant documents she will include as exhibits in the motion. She also obtains the criminal disposition for the DUI and arrest report. She also obtained a letter from Alcoholics Anonymous, stating his client would be able to attend meetings if he is released from the ICE facility. In her notarized letter, the client’s wife states she will drive him so that he will not have to drive, and she provides her driver’s license, proof she owns a car and car insurance.

Since the attorney is new to detained work, she begins to research relevant BIA case law. She feels confident that her client would not be considered a flight risk given his family and community ties, but she is worried that the client may be considered a danger to the community based on the DUI conviction. As she researches cases, she finds a 2018 BIA case that addresses DUI in the custody redetermination context. That case is Matter of Siniauskas.[6]

Headnotes from Siniauskas

Below are the two headnotes from the case:

(1) In deciding whether to set a bond, an Immigration Judge should consider the nature and circumstances of the alien’s criminal activity, including any arrests and convictions, to determine if the alien is a danger to the community, but family and community ties generally do not mitigate an alien’s dangerousness.

(2) Driving under the influence is a significant adverse consideration in determining whether an alien is a danger to the community in bond proceedings.

Looking at these headnotes, what thoughts comes to mind as it applies to our hypothetical scenario and the client? Just by reading the headnotes, it does not seem promising for the client. The first headnote essentially makes two points: the IJ should consider more than just arrests and convictions, and family and community ties that go to flight risk will not generally address whether a respondent is a danger to the community. The second headnote, however, specifically addresses DUIs and provides the “significant adverse consideration” language.

Next, read the case. I have highlighted parts of the decision. The BIA decision is four pages long, and there was no dissent. Discuss whether students believe the headnotes sufficiently summarize the decision.

Discussion/Information about Headnotes

The BIA precedent chart compiles headnotes.[7] The chart specifically states, “This document is provided for informational purposes only as a convenience to the public. It is not intended as a comprehensive source for preparing an appeal, or for citation in legal briefs, and does not represent an official publication of EOIR.”[8] Headnotes should not be cited.[9] In Supreme Court cases where there is a syllabus (headnote), there is a disclaimer to make clear the headnote is not part of the opinion.[10] The note specifically cites a 1906 Supreme Court case.[11] That case, United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co.,[12] is about a property dispute, but counsel relied on the headnotes of a previous case. The Supreme Court noted, “In the first place, the headnote is not the work of the court, nor does it state its decision…It is simply the work of the reporter, gives his understanding of the decision, and is prepared for the convenience of the profession in the examination of the reports. . .. .”[13]

Returning to the client’s case, reading the case is important to not only understand the BIA’s reasoning but also the specific facts. As the Siniauskas court explained, “[i]n bond proceedings, it is proper for the Immigration Judge to consider not only the nature of a criminal offense but also the specific circumstances surrounding the alien’s conduct.”[14] This is where the facts come into play to distinguish the case from the one in Siniauskas. In that case, the respondent had three DUI convictions, a pending DUI charge, and three out of the four involved accidents.[15] In at least one subsequent unpublished decision, the BIA agreed with an I.J. who found a respondent was not a danger to the community when the respondent’s DUI conviction was his only offense in nine years of living in the United States and his DUI did not result in injury or property damage.[16] Even though BIA unpublished decisions are not binding,[17] they are helpful when conducting research and advocating for clients and their release from ICE custody. In our scenario, our client is closer to the respondent in the unpublished decision. In drafting the bond motion for her client, the attorney should cite both cases and explain why the I.J. should find our client is not a danger to the community. As a practical matter, I often include unpublished BIA cases as exhibits.

Headnotes, no doubt, are a helpful tool that students and practitioners can use when researching and drafting. But encourage students to go beyond the headnotes and delve into the details of the case, rather than exclusively looking at headnotes. This exercise will make students better prepared and ready for internships and eventually when they practice.

[1] Bill Chamberlain, What to Know about Your First Summer Internship, ABA Student Lawyer Magazine, December 1, 2016, available at https://abaforlawstudents.com/2016/12/01/what-to-know-about-your-first-summer-internship/ (last visited Oct. 11, 2021).

[2] Caroline L. Osborne, The State of Legal Research Education: A Survey of First-Year Legal Research

Programs, or “Why Johnny and Jane Cannot Research”, 108 Law Libr. J. 403, 408 (2016).

[3] Steven A. Lastres, “Rebooting Legal Research in a Digital Age,” Insights Paper, 2013, available at https://www.lexisnexis.com/documents/pdf/20130806061418_large.pdf (last visited October 11, 2021).

[4] Case Finding and Advanced Searching Strategies, Robert Crown Law Library, Stanford Law School, available at https://guides.law.stanford.edu/cases/headnotes (last visited October 11, 2021).

[5] 27 I&N Dec. 207, 209 (BIA 2018).

[6] 27 I&N Dec. 207 (BIA 2018).

[7] BIA Precedent Chart, available at https://www.justice.gov/eoir/bia-precedent-chart (last accessed October 11, 2021).

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] See, e.g., Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 141 S. Ct. 1474 (2021).

[11] Id.

[12] 200 U.S. 321, 337.

[13] Id.

[14] 27 I&N Dec. at 208 (citing Matter of Guerra, 24 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2006)).

[15] Id.

[16] N-P-N-, AXXX XXX 692 (BIA Oct. 29, 2018).

[17] See Matter of Echeverria, 25 I&N Dec. 512, 519 (BIA 2011).

How to Choose a Formative Assessment Platform to Optimize Data-Based Teaching

11AugAugust 11, 2021 By Vicky Daniels

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

Formative assessment not only helps students learn, but the data from this can help faculty teach more efficiently as discussed here. However, not all formative assessment tools are created equal for this purpose. If you want to optimize data to tailor your teaching, you’ve come to the right place!

What types of formative assessment?

Although there are a number of types of formative assessment, this post will focus on using data from short answer questions (MC, T/F, word cloud, etc.)

In class or outside of class?

Assessment tools may differ based on when they are used – in or outside of class.

There are a variety of in-class tools. There are also a number of tools for outside class assessment. These include CALI lessons, quizzes associated with casebooks, as well as platforms for Civil Procedure and Legal Research. Also, you can create your own questions in a learning management system (Blackboard, Canvas, TWEN, etc).

Given a number of options, which one should you choose? Keep reading!

What to look for in choosing a formative assessment platform
The considerations differ for in-class vs. outside class assessment. To help you focus on what matters to you, the following chart highlights features for each to potentially consider.

Assessment method

Features to consider

In-class

– Is it easy for you to use in class? (i.e. do you need to exist a slide presentation to start polling)

– Do you want to have the option to not reveal the correct answer immediately (if you want to encourage discussion of all answers first)

– Do you want to be able to see data on individual student performance and/or have a downloadable excel of data (Tophat and Socrative can but CALI’s Instapoll is always anonymous)

– Would you like students to be able to re-do questions later on their own time before seeing the correct answer for additional review (Tophat is good for this)

– Do you want the ability to have students engage in competitive teams (Socrative & Kahoot focus on this)

Outside class

-Do students receive immediate and detailed feedback, including an explanation of wrong answers?

-Does data for faculty include:

-Data on class overall (i.e. how many got question right)?

-Data on selection of each answer option (i.e. A-D) since wrong answers may reveal different flaws in understanding?

-Online ability to jump from class data to actual question?

-Data on performance of individual students over several assignments to identify persistent issues that may indicate a need for more academic support?

Examples of good feedback for outside of class “objective” data:

Feedback should ideally provide an explanation of what makes the correct answer best, as well as flaw(s) in the incorrect answer.

Here’s some examples:

Now that you know what is helpful feedback for students, it’s time to see some examples of helpful data for faculty.

Examples of helpful detailed data on all answers to individual questions

Since I don’t have access to all platforms, I’m going to use examples available to all, beginning with a quiz in TWEN.

Here is the data from a quiz I gave students that reveals how many students chose the correct answer(s), as noted with an asterisk, as well as how many chose incorrect answers.

For those that teach Civil Procedure, Click & Learn can also provide data on individual questions. This tool provides a bar graph of the number of students that got each question correct (darker color on the left) as well as the number that got it wrong. A quick scan of the chart below reveals that question 2 was the toughest question for students. The “Answer Breakdown” reveals how many students selected each choice for Q2. It shows most chose the correct answer A, as noted in teal, and that the second-most popular choice was C.

Does the assessment platform link data to questions?

A program that enables you to easily link between overall student data and the question text is also helpful. Otherwise you have to remember the question the students struggled with and then go into the Quiz itself to find the actual text of the question and answers. Here are two examples again from TWEN and Click & Learn.

As shown below, the left side shows class performance for all questions. Clicking on the question number reveals the actual text of the question and answers shown on the right.

Click & Learn provides the same functionality for those that teach Civil Procedure and adopt the text (i.e. require students to purchase it). The below diagram shows what a faculty would see by clicking on Question 2.

What next?

Once you’ve chosen your formative assessment tool, you’re prepared to start using this data to tailor your class. For details on that, check out How to Use Formative Assessment Data to Tailor Teaching “which will be next week’s blog post”.