Training the Superstar Associate: Teaching Workplace Professionalism in Legal Writing Courses

This article details efforts to increase the professional workplace skills of law students by teaching professionalism skills in a first-year legal writing course. The article describes a series of videos that demonstrate how a new lawyer’s professional attributes and attitude can create either a positive or a negative impression on a supervising attorney. Nine “what not to do” videos highlight certain types of unprofessional behavior, much of which has been personally observed among students in first-year legal writing courses. The “what not to do” videos are juxtaposed with one “what to do” video that is designed to illuminate exemplary professionalism workplace skills. These videos are a highly effective (and entertaining) tool to make law students aware that their success on the job depends not only on the substance of their legal work but also their office demeanor and interpersonal skills

A Missed Opportunity to Clarify Students\u27 First Amendment Rights in the Digital Age

In the last decade, the federal circuit courts have grappled with the issue whether, and to what extent, school officials constitutionally may discipline students for their off-campus electronic speech. Before 2015, three federal circuit courts had extended school authority to off-campus electronic speech by applying a vague test that allows school officials to reach far beyond the iconic “schoolhouse gate” referenced in the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969) Two other federal circuits had avoided the issue altogether by deciding the cases before them on other grounds. In 2015, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals became the sixth circuit court to wrestle with the issue, issuing a highly fractured decision in which multiple judges urged the Supreme Court to provide guidance on this important constitutional issue. A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed in the Fifth Circuit case but, in February 2016, just days after the unexpected death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court denied the certiorari petition. The eight-member Court thus missed an opportunity to address this important First Amendment issue. This article reviews the varied approaches the federal circuits have taken regarding the scope of school officials’ authority over students’ off-campus electronic speech. The article then proposes an analytical framework that will protect students’ free speech rights while preserving the ability of school officials to insure the safety and wellbeing of the school community

Should States Ban the Use of Non-positive Interventions in Special Education? Re-examining Positive Behavior Supports Under the IDEA

In the 1980s and 1990s, behavior analysts vigorously debated ethical concerns about the use of certain behavioral interventions to address severe behavior of disabled children. In 1997, while that debate was still ongoing, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was amended to require educators to consider the use of “positive behavioral interventions and supports,” among other strategies, to address problem behavior that impedes a disabled child’s learning. Since 1997, the “positive behavioral interventions and supports” framework has shifted focus, but IDEA’s language essentially has stayed the same. In addition, some states have enacted poorly-worded statutes or regulations in order to define positive or non-positive interventions. The legal requirements for behavioral interventions became even more convoluted after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that a State may ban the use of any non-positive interventions, even though non-positive interventions can be effective tools to address severe behavior, particularly self-injurious and aggressive behavior, in disabled children. This article contends that a complete ban on the use of non-positive behavioral interventions violates a core tenet of the IDEA, specifically that each child with a disability is entitled to an individualized education program designed to meet that child’s unique needs. After an in-depth review of both the science and the law pertaining to behavioral interventions, this article proposes ways in which Congress can amend IDEA to clarify the statute’s use of behavioral intervention techniques

LRW\u27s The Real World: Using Real Cases to Teach Persuasive Writing

Today’s law students approach their legal education with a clear focus on acquiring the skills needed to succeed in the “real world” of lawyering. Legal writing professors can leverage this focus on the real world by using real cases to teach the principles of persuasive writing. This article describes a “case-study” method in which students analyze materials from real cases to learn the most critical components of persuasive writing – development of a theme, organization of legal arguments, and best use of case authority. As part of this exercise, students step into the role of the practitioner and construct arguments applying the law to facts taken from a real case. Students then compare their arguments to the arguments made in a real brief and assess whether the real brief met their expectations about how best to persuade a reader. This exercise provides multiple benefits for students, including making a strong connection between the principles being taught in the classroom and the use of those principles in private practice. Students gain confidence as they become able to identify and apply core persuasive writing techniques to a real-world scenario, then compare their work against that of the practitioner. By “making it real,” this exercise motivates students to analyze more deeply, thereby honing their skills

Every Day Counts: Proposals to Reform the IDEA\u27s Due Process Structure

It is a core principle of special education legislation that the parents of children with disabilities can challenge the child’s educational programming through an administrative due process hearing. Yet, for years the special education due process structure has been criticized as inefficient, anti-collaborative, and prohibitively expensive. Those criticisms have given rise to widely varying proposals to reform special education due process, proposals that range from adding certain alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to a wholesale replacement of the due process structure. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of special education dispute resolution. The article first examines the lively debate among scholars and special interest groups about perceived deficiencies of IDEA due process and various proposals to remedy those deficiencies. The article then sets forth the results of a nationwide survey in which over three hundred and fifty special education attorneys voiced their opinions about the current structure and some proposals for reform. Finally, the article recommends certain structural changes to IDEA due process that are designed to improve the efficiency and reduce the cost of special education dispute resolution