What the Best Law Teachers Do:
Project Description
Project Goals
The goals of this project are
- to identify the best law teachers in America,
- to synthesize the principles by which they teach, and
- then to share these principles and stories of these wonderful teachers by documenting them in a book.
Project Timeline
I hope to complete my research over the next two and a half years, producing What the Best Law Teachers Do (Harvard University Press) by January 2011.
Project Design
The project consists of four phases:
- an initial phase during which I develope a call for nominations and solicit and receive nominations;
- an investigation-focused second phase during which I decide which nominees warrant further investigation, gather additional evidence and decide which nominees should be subjects of my study;
- a qualitative study phase during which I visit each subject's law school, attend class sessions, and interview students, alumni, peers and the nominees, and
- an evaluation, reflection and writing phase during which I synthesize the data and write the book.
Each of these phases is described in greater detail below. While this discussion almost makes it sound as if the process will be a linear one, I suspect nominations will come in waves spread out throughout my project timeline as more and more law teachers learn about the project.
Phase I
The focus of the first phase is to generate as many credible nominations as possible. The process started when I adapted Ken Bain's definition of "exceptional teaching" to the legal education context and then designed this web site. I then drafted a transmittal e-mail and letter to send to law professors, law deans, students, and law school alumni soliciting nominations. Starting now and continuing as long as I can, I will be encouraging and collecting nominations, evaluating the credibility of the nominations I receive, and sharing these nominations with the legal education community. Nominations will not be posted absent consent from the nominee.
Phase II
During the second phase, I will be more closely evaluating the nominations and deciding which warrant further investigation. I will contact each such nominee and the nominator, asking them to provide evidence that the nominee produces "extraordinary learning." While I will consider all submitted evidence, I also do have suggestions as to the evidence I am most interested in. In many instances, I will ask for additional evidence and even interview the nominator, the nominee and a select few others. By the end of this phase, I not only will have decided who will be the subjects of my study, but, also, I will be choosing not to pursue a significant number of nominations, including, unfortunately, nominations of some very good law teachers.
Phase III
In the third phase, having decided who will be the subjects of my study, I will conduct the study. For each subject, I plan to visit one or more class sessions (I may decide to visit some sessions by video camera), conduct a lengthy interview of the subject, meet with focus groups of students (and alumni if possible), and otherwise collect additional evidence of effectiveness. I will be vigilant for common themes and start developing hypotheses about the common traits of the best law teachers.
Phase IV
In this phase, I will synthesize the results of my study and honor my contract with Harvard University Press to complete What the Best Law Teachers Do in January 2011.
Project Investigator
Professor Michael Hunter Schwartz
Washburn University School of Law
1700 SW College Ave., Room 309
Topeka, KS 66621
(785) 670-1666
michael.schwartz [at] washburn.edu
