gregh  2007-06-24 16:17  Collective  Law_School  syndication  web_2.0   

A recent observation has led me to consider how I think I would put together a law school website. I've discussed some related ideas in the past. At that point, my obvious consumer was the law student. There is, of course, a broader audience for the site as a whole. In addition to students, there are prospective students, professors, prospective professors, staff, and the outside world.

This time around, perhaps I will examine this issue from the perspective of key principles.

Embrace Commentary

Like most businesses, law schools tend to administer commentary very carefully when they can. This overlooks the reality that both good and bad comes from open dialog. Open up commentary and allow the community to share information about what's going on. If it's particularly sensitive, you can always limit it to within the community. However, beyond what's protected by privacy laws, there's little harm in allowing people to talk. In fact, that hardest part is getting people to talk.

How do we get people talking?

• The law school should take on the role of getting people talking. Whether they do so via discussion-oriented mailings lists, web discussion boards, blogs, or, preferably, an appropriate combination, the school has all of the contact information, and the school has the means to get the conversation started.
• Blogs. Yes, it's part of the first point, but it remains important. Get the registrar's office to blog about why it's taking time to post the next semester's schedule. Have the CSO blog about job postings, upcoming events, or just what's happening around the office. Get professors blogging, letting the community know about their research, their publications, their classes, etc. Get the students blogging. Yes, folks will see this as a risky venture, but let the students say what they're going to say. Are they not saying it if they're speaking only amongst themselves? Hardly.
• Polls and ratings. Get people to provide feedback about classes, professors, the sandwiches in the cafeteria, etc.

People who converse with one another form communities. Communities tend to be loyal. Schools need all the loyalty they can get.

Embrace Sharing

Why is it that the bulk of the search requests that bring people to my site relate to the USF School of Law information I've posted? Because I've posted it online, and the school hasn't. A school should make information like the student handbook, grade distributions, status of grade postings from professors, etc., all available online.

Students should be encouraged to share. Yes, law school is competitive; more precisely, the job market leaving law school is competitive. So what? That doesn't mean that the school can't foster sharing among the students. Establish official channels for students to share notes, outlines, recordings of lectures (where professors permit it, obviously), and commentary on courses. Is it fair to students that the only way to find out about a professor's class is to happen upon someone who previously took that professor's class?

Think Wiki. Imagine a student-oriented course catalog, which allowed the students to edit details of the course, add commentary, and comment on the styles of various professors. There's a lot of institutional knowledge in the faculty, who are often quite willing to share their opinions. There's a lot of institutional knowledge in the student body, but that knowledge rotates through every 3 or 4 years. Being unable to harness one or both is a horrible shame.

Embrace Syndication

Communication and sharing are going to get a lot of information flowing around. In addition, members of the community are reading and observing a lot, all of which can be tagged and noted by one of the many social networking systems. That data moves around through syndication, and the best way to get information flowing to the appropriate places is to get into it.

Set up aggregators, get feeds going on everything, and get people used to reading from sources that use those feeds. Make it easy for people to subscribe. More importantly, make it easy for people to generate content back into the syndicate.

I might like to know when a new job has been posted to the careers site. Why don't I have a feed for that? The whole community might like to know when an office might be closed, or when a new research article has been published, or when an important date is fast approaching. It's too easy to rely on email, but email clutters everything up, because it sends out a lot of information a lot of people don't care about.

For instance, most staff member probably wouldn't care for a notification when grades for a class have been posted. In fact, it may well be that only students in that class care. Why not give me a place to subscribe to notices about that class? I'll know if the professor's out, I'll know what the reading assignment is, and I'll know when the grades have been posted.

All of this is just picking at the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot of depth in this, a lot more than I've got the time to write up.

gregh  2006-06-24 18:31  Collective  Grading  Law_School   

I've posted current versions of the percentile-by-GPA breakdown for USF, as of Spring 2006. I've also updated the USF First-Time Bar Passage Rate by Quintile document.

In the case of the former, the good news (for me) is that my performance this past semester moved me back into the top-15%.

gregh  2006-06-24 18:26  Collective  Law_School  rank  usf   

This table shows the breakdown of percentile ranks by GPA for the University of San Francisco School of Law as of the Spring 2006 semester, i.e., as of the end of the 2005-2006 school year.

	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%	33 1/3%	40%	50%	60%	80%	100%
1FT & 1PT = 247	3.472 & above	3.293 - 3.471	3.195 - 3.292	3.117 - 3.194	3.052 - 3.116	2.959 - 3.051	2.876 - 2.958	2.731 - 2.875	2.552 - 2.730	2.268 - 2.551	2.267 & below
2FT, 2PT & 3PT = 228	3.511 & above	3.384 - 3.510	3.296 - 3.383	3.202 - 3.295	3.136 - 3.201	2.995 - 3.135	2.911 - 2.994	2.850 - 2.910	2.781 - 2.849	2.545 - 2.780	2.544 & below
3FT, 4FT & 4PT = 229	3.552 & above	3.451 - 3.551	3.349 - 3.450	3.292 - 3.348	3.207 - 3.291	3.148 - 3.206	3.068 - 3.147	2.995 - 3.067	2.858 - 2.994	2.599 - 2.857	2.598 & below

gregh  2006-06-13 00:28  Collective  Law_School   

I don't know how I missed these. At a year, they're old. Here are some of my fav's (in my order of chuckleness):

De Novo: You Might Be a Law Student If...:

Your mother's so fat she's always in diversity jurisdiction.

Your mother's so old, Scalia cites to her.

Your mother's so old, she can't be the measuring life.

You're so stupid you have your own reasonable person standard.

Your mother's so fat her manufacturer was strictly liable for not making her beep when backing up.

gregh  2006-05-31 10:15  Collective  Law_School   

Update: Don't complain about the Dark Overlord (as one of my profs used to refer to the registrar's office); they do always get their information posted, even if it's never soon enough for me.

First Assignments Summer 2006:

SUMMER 2006

FIRST ASSIGNMENTS

The law registrar's office has posted but hidden the first assignments for the summer. Take a look at the link, and unless it's been updated since I wrote this, the First Assignments link placeholder is still dead. Instead, if you're over-anxious like me and keep checking out the link under Spring registration information, you will indeed find the first assignments.

In fairness, they're no doubt revamping the site for fall registration at the same time, and since they figure that no one will do any work until the weekend anyway, why bother?

Now, with the TBA book announced as well as Pudd'nhead Wilson by Mark Twain, this truly will be a summer of firsts. I've somehow managed to escape to this point in my life without having read Shakespeare, Kafka, or Twain. In this one class, three gaping holes will be not filled, but at least addressed.

And BTW, my first assignment:

Law and Literature
Professor Brown
First Assignment:

Please read The Merchant of Venice for the First Class.

Note:

The TBA book is Pudd’nhead Wilson by Mark Twain. You will be given a syllabus with the order of the books at the first class.

gregh  2006-05-15 16:59  Collective  Law_School   

It's May 15, and there's been not a single word from the registrar's office about registration for next year. Last year this time, the schedule came out late, but not like this.

I realize this isn't critical; after all, classes don't start for another 3 months anyway. But it would be nice to have had the schedule, at the very least, while people were together. Waiting until everyone's gone makes it impossible to meaningfully ask others what they thought of particular professors, what they thought of professors at particular times (some do better at night than others), and for that matter, what classmates are taking. It might be nice, for instance, if someone I trust and would like to work with and I are going to take the same class at some point to maybe be able to schedule it together.

But no. It's mid-May, and all we've seen so far is a tentative list of the classes to be offered and whether they'll be offered during the day or the evening.

Sometimes, you'd think they'd never done some of this stuff before.

gregh  2006-05-02 11:53  Collective  Law_School  Website   

Otherwise Alienating:

In this case I agree with Greg completely, but in more general terms I like listening to debates about Constitutional law and the such. I find it all intensely interesting. Enought that occationally I find myself thinking that law school would be a hell of a lot of fun.

And then I remember that I have the memory capacity of a walnut, and if I can't derive what I am supposed to remember from first principles I am hopeless, so if I had to remember case references and specifics of laws and procedures without having them right in front of me, I'd be done for.

That was Sam, in response to an earlier post of mine.

First, it always pains me to see a snippet of something I've written posted somewhere with a typo. I didn't put a whole lot of effort into editing this particular rant, but it would still be nice to avoid such things. In the section quoted, there was at least one clear typo and a couple of sketchy (requiring further analysis) grammatical choices.

For Sam and others, it is important to keep in mind that there's not a whole lot of actual argument (or even intellectual discussons) in law school. This particular rant came from a companion site on Westlaw's TWEN (The West Educational Network), which we were required to participate on (More of my take on TWEN happenings here and more generally, here.) What I've found is that many of my classmates appear completely unwilling to take on these topics energetically. There were actually two more responses by the guy I questioned in this post, but that was pretty unusual, including for him. In fact, my style was intentionally somewhat different here. You might note that I actually questioned his views, rather than writing a more detached response. I was largely hoping to elicit a response.

In class, almost all discussion focuses on the case decisions being analyzed. There's not a lot of debate or even philosophical discussion, though we did touch a bit more on that in Con Law than in others.

Actually, Prof. Adler, our Con Law professor, encouraged more such interaction than most. He mandated participation on TWEN, and he also held 5 class exercises, and in all but one exercise, students represented either Supreme Court Justices or attorneys representing parties in simulated oral arguments. I participated for the first time in one of these last night as, after some lobbying -- thanks, Mr. Peters, Justice Scalia. (I felt we hadn't had enough Scalia injected by previous Scalias, so I did my part to try to inject a little more Scalia than usual.) These exercises gave us more opportunities to actually treat these things more philosophically.

Despite my general distaste for TWEN's technologies, I also appreciated having that avenue to discuss these things. I tend to like to see my ideas before speaking about them, and class discussion doesn't really lend itself to that. Using TWEN, I can write out hopefully cogent arguments. If someone comes back and can convince me I'm wrong, so much the better. I've learned. Or, I can write a response back, clarifying their points. Again, hopefully, we've both benefited by seeing other views, being questioned, and having to defend our perspectives. (Prof. Adler mentioned that he was pleased they occasionally even got feisty... and then looked at me.)

At the end of class, during the usual process of telling us how much he enjoyed the semester, Prof. Adler pointed out that this was the last time our section was going to be together as a group. With the exception of a few who have dropped out, and a couple we picked up for one reason or another, all but two of my classes this far have been with the same group of students I started with 4 semesters ago, in the fall of 2004. Last night was the last regular meeting of our scheduled required classes (we meet for a Crim Pro review session tomorrow night.) He handed out copies of our seating charts to memorialize the group. It was right up there with Prof. Travis handing us keys (a different story.)

I don't believe I've previously posted this here before, but if you're curious to see the sort of folks I've been hanging out with the last couple of years, here's a photo Professor Osborn commissioned of us, as we ended the second of our two semesters of contracts with him (click for the full-sized version):

Starting next semester, we go our separate ways in scheduling.

gregh  2006-04-27 11:34  Collective  Law_School   

My most recent TWEN diatribe, regarding a rather nonsensical rant against the holding in Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston:

I can't imagine how frustrating it must be when a sacred cow is slaughtered at the hands of such a crazed Court, such as in this unanimous decision.

I find Hurley to be a deeply troubling legitimization of hatred.

I'm not surprised. However, a logical reading of the decision can't lead to such an opinion.

I also find it a bit troubling that the class seemed to believe that Boy Scouts was so obviously wrong but that Hurley was so obviously right.

Some us apparently believe in freedom of speech and its concomitants, while others merely believe in it until a politically correct topic is adversely impacted by that right.

First, there was no "licensing system." There were votes by the members of the expressive association about which other groups properly supported their views. They had no perpetual grant of a license, and, in fact, had to apply every year. The city had in no way delegated authority over such matters to the SBAWVC.

Second, the parade was private and had been private for some time. As above, the SBAWVC was required annually to apply for a permit. They elected their internal representatives, planned the parade, and decided what messages to include in their expression. The fact that an activity was once public but had long before gone private certainly doesn't imply state action.

You suggest that decision would make it easy for states to allow discrimination in their events, by turning over your so-called "licensing" to private organizations. However, if a state actor actually did delegate control to a private group with the intent to discriminate against groups, that would be a different situation, indeed. Unless, of course, you've dug up some other information that suggests that, in the rollicking, gay-happy post-War era, this parade was turned over by the city in an effort to allow exclusionary policies to come to fruition.

Third, as to the Jaycees, you're simply attributing something different to the impact than the Court did. The impact on the Jaycees' message was minimal, because 1) they already admitted female members; and 2) nothing about admitting female members required a change in their message pertaining to the education of young men. The Court wasn't requiring that they change that message. In short, there was little-to-no impact on the group's expression.

Fourth, the elephant you perceive simply isn't there. The GLIB group was making a statement:

In 1992, a number of gay, lesbian, and bisexual descendants of the Irish immigrants joined together with other supporters to form the respondent organization, GLIB, to march in the parade as a way to express pride in their Irish heritage as openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals, to demonstrate that there are such men and women among those so descended, and to express their solidarity with like individuals who sought to march in New York's St. Patrick's Day Parade.

The latter is clearly a political expression, and is almost definitely a message that the SBAWVC did not wish to express, likely in solidarity with their brethren in New York. The former may be less political, but is still a message, especially when it comes from a self-identified group that wishes to be independently recognized. After all, there was no reason someone couldn't have marched individually while being openly gay. But that wasn't what GLIB was after; GLIB was looking to send a message of its own. Their message that they're Irish was congruent with that of the SBAWVC. Their message that there are Irish homosexuals is at best orthogonal to the main message. And their message in support of the New York group was almost unquestionably counter to expressions the SBAWVC wanted to make.

Fifth, you assert:

Regardless of legal analysis, Hurley would not have come out the same way if Blacks or women or Christians had been denied a float in the parade. Since we are not dealing with Equal Protection on this issue, there is no reason for treating the exclusion of those groups any differently from the exclusion of GLIB.

As you said, this was not an Equal Protection issue. the SBAWVC wasn't denying access to gays, blacks, women, or any other (potentially) suspect class. What they were doing was prohibiting a distinct group from expressing a message they felt ran counter to their own. Do you really think it would be cut-and-dried if the Nation of Islam decided it wanted to march in the parade?

But that is hardly the point, anyway. This is about the freedom of expression. And while I can only gather that you believe only in freedom of expression for those expressing views you feel are "right," I'm having difficulty understanding why you think the SBAWVC should be forced to express a view that it's okay to be openly homosexual and Irish. Neither you nor I nor the Supreme Court should tell people what they must believe. People have the rights to be bigots in this country, and they have and must have the rights to express whatever bigotry they so choose.

Finally, you close with this gem:

I guess the rule to take away is that a group can only discriminate if the discrimination is integral to the group's message, but if the discrimination is against gays, the Court will automatically presume that discrimination to be integral.

Or, you can take away the more meaningful idea that freedom of expression is critical, that parades are inherently expressive activities, and that groups that organize parades, whether their views are popular or not, should have the right to determine was messages their expressive activity will send.

gregh  2006-04-18 10:48  Collective  Law_School   

Interestingly, at least three candidates for positions in the USF Student Bar Association are touting some technology solutions to problems I've been harping on for a while. Professor ratings, comments on classes, school-based email lists (versus the hodgepodge of Yahoo Groups floating around now.)

Both SBA President candidates have brought it up. A VP candidate has endorsed the views of one the presidential candidates. And I've already contacted one to offer my assistance. I was planning on doing so this summer, anyway. Basically, I feel these should be on-site, SBA-supported activities. Students should be able to (anonymously but moderated) review professors and classes. Students should be able to exchange notes and outlines. Students should be able to subscribe to various organizations' lists. Students (and professors) should have an outlet to blog, whether about classes, life at the school, events coming up, etc. Students should be able to add events to events calendars, get a view of what's coming up, etc.

There are all sorts of things that could be offered with minimal pain. I'd like to see us get there.

It will be interesting to see what actually happens. I've now been through two SBA presidents, and it's amazing the way the character of the organization can change. Last year's president was always doing something, always communicating. This year's president seems, at best, to be working behind the scenes. But mostly, I gather she took the position for the financial benefit and the resume line. The only things I've read from her this year have been rather negative swipes at the school administration, which isn't the most helpful thing to do. Hopefully the new candidates will seem more interested.

gregh  2006-03-28 13:23  Collective  Law_School   

There's a larger story here about the process of getting this exported from Tinderbox, but some of it involves oddities I still don't have fixed; I just know that the appropriate copy and paste fixes it.

However, for the two people who have asked for them, my notes so far for Constitutional Law and Criminal Procedure.