This program, coordinated and moderated by Kim Clarke (McGeorge School of Law), introduced the key aspects of the Carnegie Foundation’s report, Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law (2007); explored the need for change in legal education; and served as a forum for discussion about the role of law libraries and individual librarians in this process of curriculum reform. Professor Clarke introduced the program by observing that law schools are coming under increased pressure to balance teaching students how to “think like lawyers” with what Stanford Law School Dean Larry Kramer refers to as “translational skills.” These skills entail the ability to translate concepts, ideas, and analytical tools learned in the classroom into actual context and into practice.
Throughout the legal academy, the Carnegie Report has been used as a springboard for discussions of curriculum reform. In this program, a co-author of the report, Judith Welch Wegner (University of North Carolina School of Law), provided an overview of the report's observations and recommendations.
Professor Wegner outlined current legal education in terms of “apprenticeships”: cognitive; skills and practice; and professional identity and values. Law schools are quite successful in providing a “cognitive” apprenticeship in which students can develop the knowledge required for legal analysis. The case dialogue method is effective in teaching students to “think like a lawyer.” To a lesser degree, law schools provide an apprenticeship of “skills and practice.” Skills instruction, however, is generally not systematic throughout the curriculum and is often gained through extra-curricular activities. Finally, law schools essentially are failing when it comes to providing an apprenticeship of “professional identity and values.” According to Professor Wegner, “professional formation” in legal education must encompass all these facets.
The authors of the Carnegie Report drew upon insight from the “learning sciences,” and Professor Wegner particularly recommended the text How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice (National Academies Press 1999). Professor Wegner emphasized the role of “expertise” in the learning process. Students develop from novices to experts in a contextualized setting. This development of expertise proceeds in stages, and includes the mastery of a repertoire of scenarios and working with poorly defined problems. Not all knowledge and skills are readily learned from books, and tacit learning occurs through observation, imitation, and experiences. Finally, assessment drives learning.
The case dialogue method has been the “signature pedagogy” in legal education. This powerful and distinctive method works very effectively in context - at least for a period of time. It is very powerful in the first year, but beyond that year it loses its impact: students no longer want to “play the game”; it is not necessarily the best way to teach everything; and those who did not develop the analytical skills the method aims to produce in the first year are not going to develop those skills by engaging in “more of the same.” The Carnegie Report questions whether the case dialogue method is used beyond the point necessary and suggests that reliance on this method does not allow for the adequate development of practical skills and professional identity.
Professor Wegner wrapped up her introduction by noting that, in addition to the Carnegie Report, there are multiple forces for change in legal education, including other studies and publications, such as CLEA’s Best Practices in Legal Education: Education: A Vision and a Road Map (2007); heightened expectations of accountability, including university accreditation standards focusing on output measures; financial realities facing students; and demographic changes in student bodies. In light of these pressures, it is increasingly important for law schools to examine their entire curriculum. Law schools must consider the scope and aims of first-year education and the progression of learning beyond the first year. Schools need to integrate skills instruction and the development of professional identity and values throughout the curriculum.
Following her presentation, Professor Wegner joined Faye Jones (Florida State University), Billie Jo Kaufman (American University), and Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker (McGeorge School of Law) for a panel discussion. Panelists first addressed the role libraries can play in curricular reform and how librarians can ensure they are included in discussions. Panelists suggested that librarians should attend their law school’s curriculum development meetings and offer input; develop our own “best practices”; attend legal education conferences; develop and promote an additional “signature pedagogy” for legal research instruction; and do more teambuilding with Legal Writing and substantive law faculty.
Dean Parker raised the fact that research and the role of the library was not touched upon in the Carnegie Report. Dean Parker suggested that librarians should nonetheless view the report as a call to action. In her view, librarians have shifted from a more traditional focus on research and have assumed a stronger teaching role. Research and access to information have become incredibly complex and students need to understand those complexities. Law schools have not yet addressed where research fits within the curriculum, and librarians must assist in this process by defining their role and determining how they will fulfill that role.
Panelists agreed that the report's call for an integrated approach to skills instruction may provide opportunities for librarians to engage in more meaningful instruction. Many law libraries are already making progress in this area, by offering research lectures in substantive classes and creating websites to support student research in those classes. It is important to integrate research instruction in upper class seminars because there is no way to introduce all relevant sources in the first year.
The panelists discussed the effect an increased teaching role might have on the skill set required for effective librarians. Librarians can develop and strengthen their teaching ability by observing excellent teachers; going to workshops; developing skills to teach millennials and to teach to multiple learning styles; and learning to integrate technology. Teachers improve skills by practicing, teaching, and reading their teaching evaluations. It was observed, however, that we cannot expect all librarians to fit the same role. Not all librarians will become expert teachers, but there are many different needs within the library.
The next issues addressed were how librarians can fit teaching into their workload, and when librarians should be paid for teaching a course. Professor Jones suggested that teaching is the most important part of the librarian’s job and that librarians should not be paid for fulfilling that role. Other panelists felt it should be determined on a case by case basis, and might depend on whether or not teaching took place outside the normal workday. Perhaps the best advice is that one should address any compensation issue up front.
Finally, the panelists addressed ways in which librarians can integrate ethical issues into legal research instruction. Panelists agreed that law schools have an obligation to educate students about identifying authentic and excellent authority and about citing authority adequately. Students also need to be educated about the potential for unauthorized practice of law when lending research assistance.
Overall, the program served as an excellent introduction to the influential Carnegie Report and its recommendations for integration of skills and ethics instruction throughout the curriculum. The panelists held an excellent discussion regarding the role law libraries and librarians can play in implementing the report’s recommendations. Attendees left the program with new information and much food for thought.