Skip to main content

Letter to A First-Time (Legal Research) Instructor

Dear Friend,

Seven years ago this week, I was prepping madly to teach my first legal research class.  Three months earlier, I'd been a law student myself.  To say that I was nervous is an understatement; mildly terrified was probably a more apt description.  The truth is I didn't really know what I was getting myself into, but I knew that I wanted to teach legal research differently than I had been taught legal research, where at best it was viewed as a skill less important than everything else being taught at law school and at worst an afterthought, a skill that students should be able to do with very little training. 

There are many points I wish I knew then that I know now and that's what I want to share with you today. 


First and foremost, students will forgive many imperfections in the classroom if they know you care about their learning.  At the start of every semester, I re-read Kent Syverud's "Taking Students Seriously: A Guide for New Law Teachers," 43 J. Legal Educ. 247 (1993), recommended to me by Professor Susan Kuo, a colleague at the University of South Carolina School of Law, early in my career.  Syverud gives three propositions about teaching, which have all proved true in my experience:
    • "Your students will know whether you like and respect them, and if they know that you do not, you will fail as a teacher."[1]
    • "If your students know that you like and respect them, they will forgive a great deal in the classroom."[2]
    • "If your students know that you like and respect them, they will come to you for as much advice and support as you have the time and energy to provide."[3]
Caring can be shown in any number of ways, no matter how introverted or extroverted you might be, including setting clear expectations, showing some empathy to the challenges inherent to being a law student, being accessible for questions and concerns students might have, or sharing your own excitement for your subject matter.

Second, it's okay not to know everything; you know enough or you wouldn't be the one at the front of the class.  Imposter syndrome in the classroom is no joke.  Most of us feel it at one point or another (I would even go to so far as to say that if you do feel it, you're probably doing something right).  But you were hired for your expertise and are there because you have knowledge that you can share with your students.

That being said, it's absolutely okay to say you don't know the answer to a question and it actually models to students that it's normal not to have all the answers--something many law students struggle with.  After class, find the answer to share in the next meeting.  Your students will appreciate your forthrightness and your humanity.

Third, knowing enough isn't enough to make you a good teacher.  Even with all the expertise in the world, it takes work to be a good teacher, a person who is able to help another person gain expertise in that area.  In fact, studies show that experts oftentimes have a difficult time teaching novices because our brains can make leaps that the novice learner's brain cannot.  To be a good teacher, you have to put some thought into how learners learn--and not rely just on how information was conveyed when you were the learner.  Ask yourself how you can help your students retain their learning long-term, how you can engage them, and how you can support them in their learning. Sure, it can be scary to try new things in the classroom, but keep in mind that first and most important point--that as long as students can tell that you care about their learning, they'll going to forgive a learning strategy that may fall flat in its first iteration.

Fourth, you're not alone.  We all start somewhere and as long as you're dedicating time and space to working on becoming the best teacher you can be, you're doing something right. Additionally, there's a network of law school professors who care and thinking deeply about their teaching and who are dedicated to moving legal education toward a curricular model centered around helping students learn.  No doubt there are also some in your law school building.  Find those folks, share ideas, learn from them, and thank them.  

I know you can do this, even if you're mildly terrified like I was once upon a time.


[1] Kent D. Syverud, Taking Students Seriously: A Guide for New Law Teachers, 43 J. Legal Educ. 247, 247 (1993).

[2] Id. at 248.

[3] Id.


Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Why Experts Can Struggle to Teach Novices

This week in our Slack group on teaching , there was an interesting discussion about expertise and the amount of time needed to prep for instruction. I mentioned something that I recalled reading: that experts can be less effective in teaching novices because often the expert skips cognitive steps that the novice learner needs to understand.  I thought I'd dig into this a little more today on the blog. The fact is novices and experts learn very differently.  The major reason for this is that experts not only know a lot about their chosen discipline, but they understand how that discipline is organized. As such, what has a clear structure to the expert is a jumbled set of unorganized information to the novice.  The information presented to novices "are more or less random data points."[1]  In contrast, when the expert learns something new in her area of expertise, she just plugs it into the knowledge structure that already exists in her long-term memory. Because the new
Read more

Motivation in the Legal Research Classroom

Motivating students in the legal research classroom can be a challenge. As we know, there are many false narratives surrounding students' conceptions of legal research's importance, interest level, and ease, all of which can result in a decrease in students' motivation to engage in this subject matter. There are two types of motivation--intrinsic and extrinsic.  Extrinsic motivation occurs when students are motivated by an outside reward or punishment;[1] in instruction, this is often the grades students will get on research assignments or the participation points they might receive for actively engaging with in-class exercises.  Intrinsic motivation , on the other hand, occurs when students are interested in the topic for its own sake.[2] Due to legal research's false narratives, students entering our classrooms tend to be drive primarily by extrinsic motivation.  The problem is, as Julie Dirksen aptly notes in her excellent book Design for How People Learn , &qu
Read more

Helping With Student Focus & Motivation in the Remote Classroom, Part 3: Limiting New Technologies to Reduce Extrinsic Cognitive Load

A librarian colleague used to say to me, "Technology is great until it's not." This couldn't be more true in the classroom.  As many of us prepare for a fall entirely or partially online, there's a rush to familiarize ourselves with lots of new educational technology to teach our classes. There's this sense that if you're not using the best and newest ed tech in your class, you're doing something wrong. Fortunately, the science doesn't back this up.  Using too many different types of technology can be a contributing factor to cognitive overload in students . Cognitive load is a term cognitive psychologists use to describe the mental challenge that the limitations of working memory puts on a student's learning.[1] Basically, working memory is extremely limited in both time and duration. Humans can only hold on to between four and nine "chunks" of information at any given time,[2] and can only hold on to new information in their worki
Read more

Rethinking Learning Outcomes in Legal Research Courses

Learning outcomes have obvious value to our institutions.  ABA Standard 301 requires that law schools "establish and publish learning outcomes" that are designed to prepare students for "effective, ethical, and responsible participation" in the legal profession.  Usually, individual course outcomes should then align with these school-wide learning outcomes.  We include these learning outcomes in our syllabi to show our compliance with the ABA standards in our accreditation visits.  But learning objectives can, or at least should, also have a pedagogical benefit.  After all, we are including them in our syllabi for a reason--to give our students an idea of the learning experience they are about to have in the course. They should also give students a clear picture of what they should be taking with them from the course into the actual practice of law. As Edmund J. Hansen writes in Idea-Based Learning: A Course Design Process to Promote Conceptual Understanding , t
Read more

Recognizing and Supporting Unlearning In the Classroom

Students in legal research classes or workshops often struggle with unlearning.  Since most students have done some type of research during their undergraduate education, we are asking them to do something (at least somewhat) familiar in a new way.  When students are try to unlearn something, they will understandably stumble over old habits.  After all, if they've always done research a certain way, like tossing search terms into a Google-like search box, it's become automatic for them, a task they do without any conscious thinking. When we ask them to use an index or Table of Contents or another tool instead, it takes conscious effort for them not to resort to their ingrained research habits. In fact, it's actually more challenging to make a conscious effort to change an existing habit than it is to make a conscious effort to do something new.[1]  Their previous processes have already become streamlined in their brain and building new structures based on new learning is
Read more