This article discusses one law professor’s successful teaching strategies for strengthening the analytical and writing skills of her students

Sparrow, Sophie M.

English

UNH Scholars' Repository

University of New HampshireUniversity of New Hampshire Scholars' RepositoryLaw Faculty Scholarship University of New Hampshire – School of Law1-1-2003Notice Students' Similarities - Not Differences[with previous generations]Sophie M. SparrowUniversity of New Hampshire School of LawFollow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/law_facpubPart of the Education Commons, and the Legal Education CommonsThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of New Hampshire – School of Law at University of New Hampshire Scholars'Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars'Repository. For more information, please contact ellen.phillips@law.unh.edu.Recommended CitationSophie M. Sparrow, "Notice Students' Similarities - Not Differences [with previous generations]," 18 THE SECOND DRAFT, BULL.of LEG. WRITING INST 10 (2003).10 THE SECOND DRAFTNotice Students’ Similarities, Not Differencesby Sophie M. Sparrow, Franklin Pierce LawCenterToday’s students are much more savvyabout electronic media—among otherthings—than former generations. Whenbored, they check out with rapidkeystrokes; my classmates and I surrep-titiously completed crossword puzzlesby hand. Nevertheless, today’s lawstudents are fundamentally similar toprevious generations. As we did, today’sstudents want to know what theirprofessors want from them. They willwork hard when we set high expecta-tions, and when they believe that we areworking with them to reach those goals.They all need a lot of practice. Theywant a job when they graduate. Theyeat food.These shared traits are where Iconcentrate my energies. In addition tousing lots of food analogies, I amextremely explicit about what I expect,and I provide as many opportunities aspossible for students to practiceanalyzing and writing.Giving students explicit writtenexpectations makes classes moreeffective—for them and for me. Itypically explain that the class will runlike a professional legal organization;they should behave like novice attor- neys. The problem is that many studentshave no idea how attorneys are ex-pected to behave. Since my job is toprepare them for the profession, and itis unfair for me to penalize them forwhat I have not taught, I give themwritten descriptions of professionalbehavior.Students read that they must beprepared and attend all classes on time.They must not interrupt others, fail toraise their hands, dominate class meet-ings, instant message, have side conver-sations during class discussion, makedisparaging comments about otherstudents, or allow their cell phones totrill. Failing to meet these and otherexpectations will result in their earning alower grade in the course.Just as students’ lack of profes-sional behavior led me to be moreexplicit, so many students’ lack ofanalytical and writing skills has led meto increase the “homework assign-ments” where they can practice theseskills. For example, most studentsstruggle to synthesize authorities tomake a rule. This is not new; studentshave been floundering with this fordecades. But students’ synthesizingdeficits do not warrant our holdingthem to a lower standard. Instead, itmeans that students need to see aprofessor model the synthesizingprocess, read and critique examples,and regularly rehearse that skill.To create an environment wherestudents can learn these skills, we requirestudents to prepare writing assignmentsfor almost every class. These includesections of a memo or brief, casematrices, case analyses, outlines, reverseoutlines, oral argument questions, self-edits, peer-edits and cognitive self-assessments. Students usually mark uptheir copies in class as we collectivelyreview the assignment; afterwards weread and provide minimal comments.Students’ performance on these assign-ments is included in their “professional-ism” score for the course.Some colleagues decry this ap-proach, saying that students shouldalready have learned the fundamentals ofboth professionalism and analysis. Maybe,but my classmates and I did not allmaster those skills nearly 20 years ago, andstudents today are no different. I wish wehad been given clearer and more rigorousexpectations, and more chances topractice. If we had, we would have beenbetter equipped to start practicing law. Iintend for our students to be ready whenit is their turn.

Notice Students\u27 Similarities - Not Differences [with previous generations]

https://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1127&context=law_facpub

Notice Students\u27 Similarities - Not Differences [with previous generations]

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UNH Scholars' Repository