Using Course-Subject Co-Occurrence (CSCO) to Reveal the Structure of an Academic Discipline: A Framework to Evaluate Different Inputs of a Domain Map

This article proposes, exemplifies, and validates the use of course-subject co-occurrence (CSCO) data to generate topic maps of an academic discipline. A CSCO event is when two course-subjects are taught in the same academic year by the same teacher. 61,856 CSCO events were extracted from the 2010-11 directory of the American Association of Law Schools and used to visualize the structure of law school education in the United States. Different normalization, ordination (layout), and clustering algorithms were compared and the best performing algorithm of each type was used to generate the final map. Validation studies demonstrate that CSCO produces topic maps that are consistent with expert opinion and four other indicators of the topical similarity of law school course-subjects. This research is the first to use CSCO to produce a visualization of a domain. It is also the first to use an expanded, multi-part gold-standard to evaluate the validity of domain maps and the intermediate steps in their creation. It is suggested that the framework used herein may be adopted for other studies that compare different inputs of a domain map in order to empirically derive the best maps as measured against extrinsic sources of topical similarity (gold standards)

Report of the AALS Committee on Libraries and Technology, Subcommittee on Law Library Reporting Structures

The reporting structure for academic law libraries is a topic of renewed debate. Tradition and accreditation standards for law schools have supported law school oversight of law libraries to ensure that library services would focus on the goals of the law school. Because legal research has been considered a bedrock component of legal education and legal practice, law libraries have long been closely aligned with law schools. However, new information technologies, increased pressures for efficiencies, growing interest in interdisciplinary work, and growing interdisciplinary demand for lawyer librarian expertise in information law have inspired questions about potential advantages of strengthening the connection between the law library and other libraries in the same university. Suggestions include not only that law libraries collaborate more with university library systems but also that law library oversight might be removed from law schools and centralized within the university library system

Clinicians Reflect on COVID-19: Lessons Learned and Looking Beyond

As a result of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic, clinical faculty had to abruptly adapt their clinical teaching and case supervision practices to adjust to the myriad restrictions brought on by the pandemic. This brought specialized challenges for clinicians who uniquely serve as both legal practitioners and law teachers in the law school setting. With little support and guidance, clinicians tackled never before seen difficulties in the uncharted waters of running a clinical law practice during a pandemic. In this report, we review the responses of 220 clinicians to survey questions relating to how law clinics and clinicians were treated by their institutions as they navigated these changes. Were clinical courses treated differently than other courses? Were clinical faculty treated differently than other faculty? Were some clinical courses treated differently than others? Did clinical faculty and staff experience pressure by their institutions to teach in-person or hybrid courses? In addition to summarizing the findings to these questions, this report examines the disparate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinicians and sheds light on some of the distinct challenges they faced. The report concludes with a list of recommended actions that law schools may take to equip themselves to provide appropriate support for clinical faculty during inevitable future emergencies, emphasizing the importance of autonomy and discretion for clinicians; specialized attention for diverse and vulnerable clinicians; and the very serious ethical and legal obligations of clinical law practices

Report of the AALS Committee on Libraries and Technology, Subcommittee on Law Library Reporting Structures

The reporting structure for academic law libraries is a topic of renewed debate. Tradition and accreditation standards for law schools have supported law school oversight of law libraries to ensure that library services would focus on the goals of the law school. Because legal research has been considered a bedrock component of legal education and legal practice, law libraries have long been closely aligned with law schools. However, new information technologies, increased pressures for efficiencies, growing interest in interdisciplinary work, and growing interdisciplinary demand for lawyer librarian expertise in information law have inspired questions about potential advantages of strengthening the connection between the law library and other libraries in the same university. Suggestions include not only that law libraries collaborate more with university library systems but also that law library oversight might be removed from law schools and centralized within the university library system