Standing at the gates: A new law librarian wonders about the future role of the profession in legal research Education

Legal Reference Services Quarterly

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 305-345

  Wright, Nolan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Collaboration; Experiential learning; Law librarians; Legal research education; Professional culture

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650539773     PISSN: 0270319X     EISSN: 1540949X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02703190802694815     Document Type: Article

References (238)

1. Task Force on Law Schools and the Profession: Narrowing the Gap, Statement of Fundamental Lawyering Skills and Professional Values (1992).
2. Id. at 1.
3. Id.
4. Id. at 3, identifying the full list of 10 skills as follows: problem-solving; legal analysis and reasoning; legal research; factual investigation; communication; counseling; negotiation; litigation and alternative dispute procedures; organization and management of legal work; and recognizing and resoling ethical dilemmas. As indicated by its title, the statement also identified a number of fundamental values of the profession, specifying four as follows: The provision of competent representation; striving to promote justice, fairness, and morality; striving improve the profession; and professional self-development.
5. Supra note 1, at v. and described in detail at 87-101.
6. Id. at 31; and see the related detailed breakdown of each of those three major components together with a commentary from the task force at 31-37.
7. See, for instance, Joan S. Howland & Nancy J. Lewis, The Effectiveness of Law School Legal Research Training Programs, 40 J. Legal Educ. 381, 382-387 (1990) (reporting the results of a survey of law firm librarians from eight major metropolitan areas in the United States with an average of 21 summer clerks and 19 first-year associates per firm; noting deficiencies in the clerk and associates' abilities to design expedient research strategies, determine appropriate research sources for specific subject matters, competently use basic legal research tools, and efficiently incorporate the use of computerized legal research and traditional legal research methodology)
8. and see also Donald J. Dunn, Why Legal Research Skills Declined, or When Two Rights Make a Wrong, 85 Law Lib. J. 49, 49 note 2 (1993) (summarizing anecdotal accounts by law firm librarians at a conference held at Wake Forest University in November 1990; because a shorter, redacted version of the article was published a year earlier under the same title, this version is referred to hereafter as "Dunn II").
9. Thomas A. Woxland, Why Can't Johnny Research? Or It All Started With Christopher Columbus Langdell, 81 Law Libr. J. 451 (1989).
10. See, for instance, Michael Vander Heijden, Bridging the Abyss: Law Librarians Come Together to Prepare New Attorneys, 12(1) AALL Spectrum 40 (2007).
11. Christopher G.Wren and Jill Robinson Wren, The Teaching of Legal Research, 80 Law Lib. J. 7 (1988) ("Wren & Wren I")
12. followed by the rejoinder from Berring and Vanden Heuvel, Legal Research: Should Students Learn It or Wing It? 81 Law. Lib. J. 431 (1989) ("Berring & Vanden Heuvel I")
13. the Wrens' response, Christopher G. Wren and Jill Robinson Wren, Reviving Legal Research: A Reply to Berring and Vanden Heuvel, 82 Law Lib. J. 463 (1990) ("Wren & Wren II")
14. and the rather cryptic finale from Berring and Vanden Heuvel, Legal Research: A Final Response, 82 Law Lib. J. 495 (1990) ("Berring & Vanden Heuvel II").
15. See, for instance, Michael A. Milleman and Steven D. Schwinn, Teaching Legal Research and Writing With Actual Legal Work: Extending Clinical Education Into the First Year, 12 Clinical L. Rev. 441 (2005-2006).
16. Marjorie Dick Rombauer, First-Year Legal Research and Writing: Then and Now, 25 J. Legal Educ. 538, 539 (1972-1973) (noting that librarians routinely were the ones that taught the bibliographic courses that sprang up soon after the beginning of the 20th century and that the bibliographic component was initially the dominant partner in the new union after the emergence of research and writing courses after World War II).
17. See, generally, Paul Douglass Callister, Beyond Training: Law Librarianship's Quest for the Pedagogy of Legal Research Education, 95 Law Lib. J. 7 (2003), and related discussion and sources below.
18. Donald J. Dunn, Why Legal Research Skills Declined, or When Two Rights Make a Wrong, in ExpertViews on Improving theQuality of Legal Research Education in the United States (1992) (hereafter "Expert Views": One of 16 papers selected by West Publishing Company from responses to its January 1991 Call for Papers; hereafter "Dunn I"). An expanded and updated version of Dunn's article was subsequently published under the same title at 85 Law Lib. J. 49 (1993) ("Dunn II").
19. Helen S. Shapo, The Frontiers of Legal Writing: Challenges for Teaching Research, 78 Law Lib. J. 719, 721-725 (1986) (including a summary of statistics from ABA surveys in 1973 and 1983 that showed a decrease in research only classes, with combined legal writing and research courses increasing from 43 to 82% of the reporting schools over that 10-year period). See also Rombauer, supra note 11, at 539 (tracing the emergence of legal research and writing courses back to the early post-World War II period and discussing the opportunities that were missed to have developed programs built around legal problem solving as a unifying theme).
20. Robert C. Berring & Kathleen Vanden Heuvel, Legal Research: Should Students Learn It or Wing It? 81 Law Lib. J. 431, 438, 440 (1989)
21. Dunn II, supra note 9, at 57.
22. Shapo, supra note 14.
23. See, for instance, Davalene Cooper, Adopting the Stepchild Into the Legal Academic Community: Creating a Program for Learning Legal Research Skills, in Expert Views, supra note 13, at 11-18
24. John D. Edwards, Teaching Legal Research: Evaluating Options, in Expert Views, at 29-36
25. Rosalie M. Sanderson, Point of Need Analysis: Improving Legal Research Skills by Providing Specialized Training at Point of Need, in Expert Views, supra note 13, at 79-84
26. Kathleen G. Sumner, An Alternative to Traditional Legal Research, Legal Writing, Legal Drafting and Appellate Advocacy Programs, in Expert Views, supra note 13, at 112-117.
27. See, for instance, Cooper, supra note 18; Virginia J. Wise, Managing Information Inflation, in Expert Views, supra note 13 at 119-124.
28. See, for instance, Jackson H. Mumey, Transforming Our Thinking: Responding to the Gap Between LRW Pedagogy and Knowledge Based Systems in Expert Views, supra note 13, at 1-10
29. and Dunn II, supra note 13. These are clearly issues that have understandably continued to dominate the attention of the law librarianship community, as discussed more fully below.
30. See, generally, Ian Gallacher, Forty-Two: The Hitchhikers' Guide to Teaching Legal Research to the Google Generation, 39 Akron L. Rev. 151 (2006)
31. Barbara Bintliff, Context and Legal Research, 99 Law Lib. J. 249 (2007)
32. Carry W. Teitcher, Rebooting the Approach to Teaching Research: Embracing the Computer Age, 99 Law Lib. J. 555 (2007)
33. Shawn G. Nevers, Candy, Points, and Highlighters: Why Librarians, Not Vendors, Should Teach CALR to First Year Students, 99 Law Lib. J. 757 (2007)
34. Suzanne Ehrenberg and Kari Aamot, Integrating Print and Online Research Training: A Guide for the Wary, 15(2)
35. Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing 119 (2007). It is interesting to note, though, with regard to the assertion that research skills have diminished, both as a result of CALR and the emergence of legal writing programs after World War II, that there are complaints about the poor research abilities of law students and lawyers dating back to at least 1902.
36. See Callister, supra note 12, at 9-10.
37. See Wren & Wren I and II and Berring and Vanden Heuvel I and II, supra note 9.
38. See Woxland, supra note 7.
39. See Peter C. Schanck, Mandatory Advanced Legal Research: A Viable Program for Law Schools, 92 Law Lib. J. 295 (2000) (stating that many of the nations law schools have been trying to improve or expand their advanced legal research offerings and that the most important reason was "the inherent limitations of first-year students to absorb legal research instruction," citing Berring & Vanden Heuvel I at 295, n. 1, as an authority for that proposition).
40. Berring & Vanden Heuvel I, supra note 9, at 441-42.
41. Id. at 442.
42. But see Michael J. Lynch, An Impossible Task But Everybody Has To Do It - Teaching Legal Research in Law Schools, 89 Law Lib. 415, 436 (1997) (noting that lawstudents are likely to devotemore energy to their courses balanced against their personal lives during the first year of law school than in subsequent years, and advising that though there are other reasons that teaching legal research later is better this factor should not be forgotten)
43. see also, Theodore A. Potter, A New Twist on an Old Plot: Legal Research Is a Strategy, Not a Format, 92 Law Lib. J. 287, 293 (2000) (advocating for teachers to set high standards from the start, inviting them to use more sophisticated research strategies and rewarding them for doing so)
44. Ian Gallacher, supra note 19, at 168-70 (noting valid points in Berring and Vanden Heuvel's argument, observing, however, that "designing a first-year curriculum that leaves students "unprepared and misinformed" and makes them "angry" is poor pedagogy and is, in any case, a wasted opportunity. Even if it only provides a grounding in research, a first-year legal research program can play a valuable role in the students' development as lawyers): see related discussion re: first-year clinic and LRW programs below at Section III(D)
45. See Dunn, supra note 13, at 49.
46. See, generally, Expert Views, supra note 13.
47. See, for instance, Cooper, supra note 17
48. Dunn, supra note 13.
49. See, for instance, Sanderson, supra note 17.
50. See, for instance, Edwards, supra note 17.
51. See, for instance, Fritz Snyder, Improving Law Student Research Skills, in Expert Views, supra note 13, at 99.
52. See, for instance, Dunn, supra note 13
53. Edwards, supra note 17
54. S. Blair Kauffman, Advanced Legal Research Courses: A New Trend in American Legal Education, Legal Reference Q., 1986, nos. 3-4, at 123.
55. See, for instance, Dunn, supra note 13, at 26-27.
56. See, for instance, Cooper, supra note 17
57. Dunn, supra note 13.
58. See, for instance, Snyder, supra note 31, at 104.
59. See, for instance, Carol L. Golden, Teaching Legal Research as an Integral Step in Legal Problem Solving, in Expert Views , supra note 13, at 37.
60. See, for instance, Sanderson, supra note 17.
61. See, for instance, Stephen R. Alton, Mandatory Prelicensure Legal Internship: An Idea Whose Time Has Come Again?, 41 U. Kan. L. Rev. 137 (1992).
62. See, for instance, I. Trotter Hardy, Why Legal Research Training Is So Bad: A Response to Howland and Lewis, 41 J. Legal Educ. 221, 224-25 (1991) (noting that "nearly everyone gives lip service to the need for research skills, so there cannot be any objection in principle to testing research as a condition for admission to the bar").
63. See Dunn II, supra note 13, citing this publication date at note 2.
64. Law librarians serving on theAmerican Association of LawLibraries (AALL) Research Instruction Caucus, Subcommittee on Research Certification, also directed considerable effort toward expanding the six-page statement of legal research competencies stated in the MacCrate Report into a far more detailed, 114-page blueprint Core Legal Research Competencies: A Compendium of Skills and Values as Defined in the ABA's MacCrate Report (Ellen M. Callinan, ed., 1997). The intended purpose of the document is unclear, though, and as a practical matter it does not appear to have had much impact, if any, on legal research education. By 1997 the Caucus no longer existed and responsibility for the document had passed to the Research Instruction and Patron Services Special Interest Section (RIPS).
65. See Reports of Chapters, Special Interest Sections, Committees, Special Committees and Task Forces, Representatives, and Washington Affairs Office 2000-2001, 93 Law Libr. J. 651, 685 (2001) (noting that RIPS was invited to resubmit the proposal to the full committee after adding a preface or introduction and a table of contents, and that the Publications Committee was not persuaded that it was more advantageous to publish the Core Competencies as part of the AALL/Hein Publications Series, as the Research Instruction Committee had suggested, than to update and enlarge upon the publication as it then existed on AALLNET)
66. and see Reports of Chapters, Special Interest Sections, Committees, Special Committees and Task Forces, Representatives, and Washington Affairs Office 2002-2003, 95 Law Libr. J. 643, 680-81 (2003) (still debating what to do with the document, describing it as a "historical reflection").
67. It is not clear whether the MacCrate Report played any role in this whatsoever. The question does not appear to have been asked as part of any published study reviewed for this article.
68. Ann Hemmens, Advanced Legal Research Courses: A Survey of ABA-Accredited Schools, 94 Law Libr. J. 209 (2002) (reporting on surveys in 1983, 1986, 1992, and 1997, in addition to her own conducted in 2000).
69. ALWD/LWI 2007 Survey Results, responses to question 35(j), available at http:/www.alwd.org and http:/www.lwionline.org, last accessed on April 16, 2008, and using the 2002 Survey Results, including 2000 data, for comparison, also available from the sites noted immediately above and last accessed on that same date. Note that the numbers reported for 2000 in the ALWD/LWI 2002 Survey Results are higher than reported in the Hemmens study cited supra at note 42 for that same period. Though it is possible that the higher number are attributable to differences in question design, it seems more likely that it is a function of response rates.
70. Hemmens, supra note 42 at 223. The ALWD/LWI Survey does not provide any data on that issue.
71. Id. at 229.
72. Id. at 229-30.
73. Id. at 223-24.
74. As noted earlier, questions can and have been raised about the extent of this reported decline, because there have been complaints about the research skill level of law students and practicing attorneys going back more than 100 years. See Callister, supra note 12, at 9-11. Perhaps as Robert Bering has suggested, the real issue is that it is more difficult to get away with sloppy research training and execution now that a rudimentary knowledge of the West Digest system is not enough, given the growing amount of and different sources of lawand access to full text onlinematerial, exceeding the capacity of the Digest System as an informational system.
75. See, generally, Robert C. Berring, Collapse of the Structure of the Legal Research Universe: The Imperative of Digital Information, 69Wash. L. Rev. 9 (1994) (particularly pp. 24-25 and 29-34).
76. ALWD/LWI 2002 Survey Results, supra note 44, at Section IV, Curriculum, questions 12, 14-16.
77. Id. at question 18.
78. Id. at questions 65-66.
79. Id. at questions 83 and 68.
80. Id. at questions 75-80.
81. ALWD/LWI 2007 Survey Results, supra note 44, at questions 75-76.
82. Id. at question 66.
83. Id. at question 18.
84. Russell Engler, The MacCrate Report Turns 10: Assessing Its Impact and Identifying Gaps We Should Seek to Narrow, 8 Clinical L. Rev. 109, 144 (2001-2002).
85. Id. at 114, quoting page 238 from the MacCrate Report (emphasis added).
86. Id. at 145.
87. Id. at 145.
88. Deborah Jones Merritt & Jennifer Cihon, New Course Offerings in the Upper- Level Curriculum: Report of an AALS Survey, 47 J. Legal Educ. 524, 534-35 (1997).
89. Id. at 551.
90. Charles Martell, The Elusive User: Changing Use Patterns in Academic Libraries 1995 to 2004 , 68 College & Research Libraries 435 (2007).
91. Deborah Maranville, Infusing Passion and Context into the Traditional Law Curriculum Through Experiential Learning, 51 J. Legal Educ. 51, 52 (2001).
92. Id. at 51-53 and 58.
93. Millemann & Schwinn, supra note 10, at 444-45.
94. Joanne Ingham & Robin A. Boyle, Generation X In Law School: How These Law Students Are Different From Those Who Teach Them, 56 J. Legal Ed. 281 (2006)
95. Gail Lynn-Nelson, The Next Generation of Learners, Training Issues Law Librarians Face In the 21st Century, 11 Spectrum 8 (2007)
96. and see generally, Marc Prensky, Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants (2001)
97. and Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part II: Do They Really Think Differently? (2001), available online at http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives%20 Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf and http://www.marcprensky.com/ writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20 Part2.pdf, respectively.
98. Maranville, supra, note 66, at 56 (explaining that there are several different aspects to the meaning of "context" for purposes of law school education as she sees it: (a) exposure to the people and real-life circumstances in which legal doctrine arises; (b) familiarity with the institutions and practices giving rise to legal disputes; (c) familiarity with the legal institutions and processes in which legal doctrines are applied; and (d) familiarity with the legal tasks that lawyers perform and the ways that knowledge of legal doctrine is integral to those tasks). Maranville continues on at page 57, using contract law as an example, explaining that related rules "will make more sense and be more interesting if students are familiar with the circumstances in which the contract would be entered, have themselves engaged in the process of forming a contract or can see examples of written contracts and are familiar with how those contract rules will be used by an attorney, either in negotiating or drafting a contract, or in arguing over the meaning of the contract after a dispute has arisen." There are obvious analogies as discussed below between this understanding of context and the concept of "frameworks" as articulated by the Wrens and further developed by Paul Callister
99. see Wren & Wren I, supra note 9
100. and Callister, supra note 12.
101. Maranville, supra note 66, at 57.
102. Id.
103. Id. at 61.
104. Additionally, see Engler, supra note 57, at 153-58, discussing the sequencing issue at length with extensive citations.
105. See, for instance, Tom Cobb, Public Interest, Collaboration, and the Promise of Wikis, 16 Perspectives: Teaching Legal Res. & Writing 1, 5 (2007)
106. citing Donald L. Finkel, Teaching With Your Mouth Shut (2000).
107. Cobb, supra note 72, at 5, specifically citing Finkel's suggestion that the instructor center the class in inquiry, "for example, a problem that hasn't and cannot easily be solved" and his further suggestion of using team teaching, modeling collaboration, as another way "to shift authority, agency, and responsibility to students."
108. Gerald F. Hess, Principle 3: Good Practice Encourages Active Learning 49 J. Legal Educ. 401 (1999).
109. Id. at 402.
110. Maranville,supra note 66, at 57-60 (and related sources footnoted therein).
111. Millemann & Schwinn, supra note 10, at 480 (describing the instructors' experience team teaching a group of second-semester first-year students, with the students working under the oversight of outside attorneys at a small firm in private practice representing individuals in police brutality cases, working with a public interest organization representing clients in dependency proceedings on right-to-counsel issues, and teaching a group of third semester students working with the school's post-conviction clinic, representing an individual in a capital murder case).
112. Id.
113. Id. at 481.
114. Id. at 484-90.
115. Id. at 479-80.
116. Id. at 480-84, with the instructors citing the following illustrations, the first two drawn from evaluations submitted by third-semester students who had been in the traditional classroom the prior year, followed by comments from some first-year (second-semester) students (see following): [W[hen you have a real ... case you don't have the guarantee that there are some cases on each side. It's not like you're going to just [take] the requisite amount of time and find the golden ring, because it might not, in fact, be there. And, even if you find it you still have to keep looking because there might be more things. And, I understand though, that certainly plays out in a regular [LRW] class but I don't think it plays out anywhere near to the extent that it did in this class. [There were] some of the foundation cases [that] were easy. But once you got past those, it was a wide-open world and that was, I thought, a little bit more challenging.
117. Id. at 480. [I]t's my understanding of the canned cases that they are built around certain court cases, and there's [sic] ten cases on the one side and ten on the other, and once ... you've found those ten everything's good. Whereas, [in this course], you didn't know what was out there. You could push a little bit further beyond the cases. The student added that "[you did a] legislative history" when necessary and "[you did] all the research that you could possibly do versus just ... finding those ten cases, and you're done." It was a "struggle" to "sit down in front of a computer, in front of Lexis and WestLaw, and ... try to come up with an answer that didn't exist. And there's so much out there." "[We had] this big problem," and "[we had] to make this choice about what we thought was the right answer and then go out and find cases that would back up our ideas." Another said: "[I]t's ... nice to think on our own again. It was important that there was "no right answer," and that students were invited to come up with different answers. This student compared this course to the first research and writing course in which, in this student's view, the students were trying to find the single, right answer that the teacher had preselected.
118. Id. at 483-84.
119. Cobb, supra note 72, describing the experience with his class and Nyberg's role working with a public interest organization in Seattle, Washington, representing clients with mental health issues facing eviction
120. see also Engler, supra note 57, at 137-38, citing efforts by several nonclinical faculty at the New England School of Law to build bridges with public interest lawyers to identify projects in need of research assistance and incorporating those projects into classroom seminars as part of required work
121. and see, generally, Cobb, supra
122. Engler, supra note 57
123. Maranville, supra note 66
124. and Millemann & Schwinn, supra note 10, for footnoted citations to other schools that have been laboratories for these experiments.
125. Id. at 4-5.
126. Personal conversation with the author on April 22, 2008.
127. Id.
128. See, for instance, Maranville, supra note 66, at 60.
129. Id.
130. Deborah Maranville, Passion, Context, and Lawyering Skills: Choosing Among Simulated and Real Clinical Experiences, 7 Clinical L. Rev. 123, 132-33 (2000-2001), describing several different aspects of what this can mean as follows: An experience can be "real" in the sense of bringing students into contact with real people and the actual problems in their lives, as opposed to actors (whether trained actors, lay volunteers, or classmates who may already know too much about the legal system) or a paper record. Alternatively, it can be "real" in the sense that the students have responsibility for producing work that will be used in the real world and will have real consequences for clients. Typically, these two aspects of reality will both be present, but that need not be so. In addition, the experience can be "real" in the sense that it is performed under conditions that are representative of those under which the worked [sic] will be performed when the law student becomes a lawyer. For instance, in-house law clinics are alternately praised and damned for their "hot-house" character, the insulation from billable hours concerns that allows students to devote far more hours to a case than it would be "worth" in the outside world, and the lower volume of cases that permits a higher standard of practice than is found in some settings.
131. See, generally, Engler,supra note 57
132. Millemann & Schwinn, supra note 10
133. and Maranville, supra notes 66 and 91.
134. Maranville, supra note 66, at 63.
135. From in-person communication with the author on May 1, 2008, identifying the Immigrant Family Assistance Project (IFAP), the Housing Justice Project, the Center for Labor and Employment Justice, and the Street Youth Advocacy Project as the four projects in question.
136. Millemann & Schwinn, supra note 10, at 458-60.
137. Id. at 458.
138. Id. at 460.
139. Id. at 458.
140. Id. at 458-59 (emphasis in the original with the exception of the last paragraph; emphasis added in the last paragraph). Millemann & Schwinnmake a further argument that gives pause, noting the hundreds of hypothetical assignments issued each year, the thousands of hours spent on them, resulting in nothing more than a grade and a pile of discarded copies. In short, "an extraordinary waste, akin to gratuitously destroying food in a community that hasmalnourished and hungry people. It also sends disturbing messages to our students and to the communities in which our schools are located: That we do not believe law students have the ability to produce work that is useful to others, or that we cannot find ways to put their work to good use." Id.
141. Wren & Wren I, supra note 9
142. Berring & Vanden Heuvel I, supra note 9.
143. Frank G. Houdek, The Essential Law Library Journal, 100 Law Lib. J. 137 (2008).
144. Id. at 161.
145. Id.
146. See, generally, Wren & Wren I, supra note 9, at 50-58.
147. Id. at 61.
148. Id. at 50-51.
149. Id. at 51.
150. Id. at 54-55, including notes 153, 155, and 156.
151. Id. at 55, n. 156, quoting the following passage from Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed. 1970), at 113. ... something like a paradigm is a prerequisite to perception itself. What a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual-conceptual experience has taught him to see. In the absence of such training there can only be, in William James' phrase, "a bloomin' buzzin' confusion."
152. Id. at 33-34.
153. Callister, supra note 12, at 23.
154. Id. at 30.
155. Id. at 8; Callister contends further that this results in a situation where the profession in his view provides "training" (conditioning students to apply certain tools and methods in a specified manner to particular types of problems) but often fails to provide "education" (learning how to "thoughtfully analyze the characteristics and nature of a specific problem and thereby develop the most appropriate technique for solving it, given one's understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of available tools and resources").
156. Id. at 23.
157. Id. at 27-28.
158. Id. at 23.
159. Id. at 34-35.
160. Id. at 31-32
161. with noted exceptions, including Peter Hook, Creating an Online Tutorial and Pathfinder, 94 Law Libr. J. 243 (2002)
162. Eileen B. Cohen, Teaching Legal Research to a Diverse Student Body 85 Law Lib. J. 583 (1993)
163. Kristin B. Gerdy, Making the Connection: Learning Style Theory and the Legal Research Curriculum, Legal Reference Services Q., 2001 no. 3-4, at 71
164. Kristen B. Gerdy, Teacher, Coach, Cheerleader, and Judge: Promoting Learning Through Learning-Centered Assessment, 94 Law Libr. J. 59 (2002)
165. and see additional exceptions identified by Callister, Id., at 32, n. 113.
166. Callister, supra note 12, at 32; Callister also suggests this may support the Wrens' criticism that traditional legal research courses were too bibliographically centered [i.e., focused on the materials as opposed to the manner in which learning takes place]. Id.
167. Id. at 17.
168. Richard A. Danner, in Houdek, supra note 99, at 162 (under the heading, "[i]n appreciation" in the write up about the Wrens' article).
169. Lynch, supra note 25.
170. Id. at 417-20.
171. Id. at 421-24.
172. Id. at 415, n. aa1.
173. Callister, supra note 12, at 23.
174. Id. at 24; additionally, with respect to the interrelationship between training in research and analysis, see, generally, Rombauer, supra note 11
175. and Berring, supra note 48.
176. Randy Diamond, Advancing Public Interest Practioner Research Skills, Legal Education, 7 N.C. J. L. & Tech. 67, 68-69, and 84 (2005-2006), citing al report at p. 83 that students know how to do painstakingly complete appellate briefing research "but do not know how to do twenty to sixty minute visits to the library that will provide enough background to know what to seek in interviewing a client, drafting pleadings, and questioning witnesses." (Internal citation omitted).
177. Id., at 72; see also Id. at 124-127 (discussing rational for simulating practioner research, using customized assignments, one-on-one mentoring, emphasis on exercising judgment, organizing, evaluating, and applying research than in finding a predetermined answer).
178. WilliamM. Sullivan et al., Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law (2007) (hereafter the Carnegie Report).
179. Statement of Fundamental Lawyering Skills, supra note 1, at 1.
180. Nelson P. Miller, An Apprenticeship of Professional Identity: A Paradigm for Educating Lawyers , 87Mich. B. J. 20, 21 (January 2008). It should be noted, however, that JudithWelchWegner, one of the co-authors and a senior scholar at the foundation during the time the law school study was carried out, was professor of law and former dean at the University of Carolina at Chapel Hill at the time of publication and past president of the Association of American Law Schools.
181. See supra note 130, at ix-x.
182. Carnegie Report, supra note 130 at ix.
183. William M. Sullivan, Work and Integrity: The Crisis and Promise of Professionalism in America (2nd ed. 2005).
184. James R. Maxeiner, Educating Lawyers Now and Then: Two Carnegie Critiques of the Common Law and the Case Method, 35 Int'l J. Legal Info. 1, 2 (2007).
185. A report on the study of clergy has already been released as well: Charles R. Foster et al., Educating Clergy: Teaching Practices and Pastoral Imagination (2005).
186. Carnegie Report, supra note 128, at 15-17.
187. Carnegie Report, supra note 128, at 22.
188. The authors list six tasks, id. at 22, common to each, that they identified as part of the goal of developing the necessary knowledge, skills, and attitude for novices to be initiated into their professions: 1. Developing in students the fundamental knowledge and skill, especially an academic knowledge base and research 2. Providing student with the capacity to engage in complex practice 3. Enabling students to learn to make judgments under conditions of uncertainty 4. Teaching students how to learn from experience 5. Introducing students to the discipline of creating and participating in a responsible and effective professional community 6. Forming students able and willing to join an enterprise of public service.
189. Id.
190. Id. at 28.
191. Id. at 25.
192. Id.
193. Id. at 23.
194. Id. at 47.
195. Id. at 50.
196. Id. at 23, 47, 50.
197. Id. at 47.
198. Id. at 53.
199. Id. at 55-56.
200. Id. at 52, citing Elizabeth Mertz, The Language of Law School: Learning to "Think" Like a Lawyer (2007), and identifying Mertz as a senior research fellow at the American Bar Association Foundation and professor of law at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School.
201. Carnegie Report, supra note 130, at 54-55.
202. Id. at 54.
203. Id. at 28.
204. Id. at 25.
205. Id.
206. Id. at 24.
207. Id. at 56-57.
208. Id. at 57.
209. Id. at 21, 27.
210. Id. at 1.
211. Id.
212. Id. at 189-90.
213. Id. at 190-91.
214. Id. at chapter 3, beginning at 87.
215. Id. at 191.
216. Id. at 58.
217. Id. at 191-92, 194-97.
218. Id. at 13.
219. Roy Stuckey and others, Best Practices For Legal Education (2007) (accessible online at http//professionalism.law.sc.edu/news.html#CLEA, last visited on May 18, 2008; also available through the Clinical Legal Educational Association (CLEA), at http//cleaweb.org/bestpractices.
220. Carnegie Report, supra note 128, at 57.
221. Id. at 14.
222. Id. at 195.
223. Id. (emphasis added).
224. Id. at 88 (emphasis added).
225. Id. at 14, 21, 27.
226. Nelson P. Miller, An Apprenticeship of Professional Identity: A Paradigm for Educating Lawyers, 87 Mich. B.J. 20 (Jan. 2008).
227. See, for instance, Donald J. Polden, Educating Law Students for Leadership Roles and Responsibilities, 39U. Tol. L. Rev. 353 (2008) (one of several related articles in that issue of the journal).
228. Ronit Dinovitzer et al., After the JD: First Results of a National Study of Legal Careers (2004).
229. See, for one recent example, Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, Access to Justice: A Justice System Imperative, Washington State Bar News, May 2008, at 16 (one of a series of articles under the heading "Ensuring Access to Justice" as the feature topic of that issue of the journal).
230. Carnegie Report, supra note 128, at 29-30 and authorities cited therein.
231. See above notes 159-161.
232. Carnegie Report, supra note 128, at 196.
233. Supra note 74.
234. Engler, supra note 57, at 149 n. 189.
235. Id. at 169.
236. Supra note 170, at vi-vii, ix.
237. Such as Tom Cobb described on the course where he teamed up with Cheryl Nyberg; see Cobb, supra note 72, at 5 n. 10. The author of this article also notes having had the privilege of working with a superb group of such individuals, including Cheryl, as an intern at the Marian Gould Gallagher Law Library at the University of Washington.
238. See Callister, supra note 12.