Advice for New Law Profs

Two days ago (Wednesday) marked the AALS deadline for inclusion of a FAR form in the first distribution.  But before we turn our attention to those who are seeking a faculty appointment, let's not forget those who are joining our ranks this month.  Borrowing from a post last summer, here are some friendly words of free advice for those who are about to embark on the first chapter of their academic career: 

Friend, Lounge visitor, two-time law school dean, and UNLV professor Nancy Rapoport suggests:

1.  Read Peter Alexander's article, Silent Screams From Within The Academy: Let My People Grow, 59 Ohio St. L.J. 1311 (1998), which covers some of the pitfalls that plague newbies.

2.  Find a "blocker."  I know nothing about football.  But I know that there are people who block for other people on the field.  I had great blockers when I started my career at Ohio State (now the Moritz College of Law).  These folks looked out for me, said "no" for me when I was starting to get overcommitted, read my drafts, gave great teaching advice, and generally mentored me.  You need someone senior on the faculty who can block for you.

3.  There is no substitute for publishing.  Publishing is the coin of the realm in academia.  You do want to be a good teacher, and the best academics I know are great at teaching and at publishing--because the two complement each other.  But there is NO WAY TO GET TENURE without publishing good stuff. 

4.  That means that, as difficult as it will be to pull yourself away from other obligations (the not-so-"secret"-secret of teaching is that visiting with students is wholeheartedly rewarding), you must budget your time.  Block out some time for research and thinking, and write up a storm whenever you can. 

5.  Rapoport's rule of threes:  no good thought should go unpublished, and while you're at it, why not think about publishing a variant of the same thing for different audiences?  Publish articles (for tenure), op-eds on your ideas (for getting your ideas out there in the world generally), and bar journal short versions of your ideas (to have a good discourse with the practicing bar).  One of the goals for tenure is to show that you have a robust research agenda, but one of the goals for getting to be a full professor is that you're an expert in your field.  You get to be an expert by engaging in useful discourse with a wide variety of people, and you'll learn all sorts of good things for your research if you spend some time with non-academics.  It's a win-win.

One of Nancy's "buddies" suggests:  advise the newcomers NOT TO TALK DOWN TO THEIR STUDENTS even when called upon and they are unprepared - treat them as equal human beings.  Nancy agrees.  "At some point, if you're too aggressive, students stop listening and therefore stop learning."

Friend, co-Lounger, and Case Western Reserve law prof Jacqui Lipton offers this suggestion:  try to feel comfortable in your own skin. If colleagues and students see that you're nervous and anxious they can play on that (either consciously or more likely unconsciously) and then you end up just feeling worse about teaching and scholarship. So I say, just be yourself. If you don't know the answer to a question, say that you don't know and that you'll get back to the student when you do - or better yet, invite the student to find the answer for you and share it with the rest of the class. If your colleague has raised something about your teaching or scholarship that has floored you, thank him/her for the interesting advice/suggestion and say that you'll think on it. And then ask others for their opinions. But don't get fazed or ruffled. Just be yourself, enjoy your time in this crazy profession and make sure you find at least one "blocker"/mentor/whatever who you trust to help you out.  

And my own suggestion?  Give some thought to what your classroom rules and expectations will be, put them in writing, distribute them as a first-day handout, and then abide by them (and if you decide to change, do so the next semester, not in mid-semester).  Let this serve as a contract between you and your students. Matters that deserve your consideration include the following:

1. Recitation: random, assigned, panels, volunteers, etc.?

2. Attendance: taken, not taken? (If you don't take attendance, don't be surprised if at least one student decides to learn the material without your assistance. Do you care? Does your school policy dictate that you care?)

3. Exam format: essay, multiple choice, short-answer, drafting, combo? Closed book, open book, anything goes, no outside commercial outlines, etc.?

4. Office hours: appointment only, drop-ins welcome? Telephone conferences? Email chats?

5. Grade adjustments: none (final grade based solely on exam performance), adjustments based on in-class performance and/or attendance, etc.?

Also -- and this is challenging the first time you teach a course -- offer the students a [somewhat] detailed daily assignment schedule (something more than "stay twenty pages ahead of me"). You probably can't distribute an exhaustive schedule on the first day of class for the entire semester, but you probably can do so in two-week blocks.

Our "fan base" includes many experienced law professors.  I hope they will offer additional suggestions to those who will step behind the podium for the first time in a matter of days.

Comments

[Howard Katz]

To the new professor - Take your tentative syllabus, the one you have been working on this summer, and cut 25% from it.
Rookie professors almost always over-estimate how much they can effectively cover.

[Orin Kerr]

Howard, that is excellent advice.

[Tim Zinnecker]

Howard, your advice probably applies to the first draft of the final exam, too. Yes?

[Mary Dudziak]

A tiny addition to this great list, on your last point about a syllabus. My advice is to have a detailed syllabus, but do not put dates on it. And of course indicate that the syllabus is subject to change.

A detailed syllabus shows students that you know where you're going, and you're in command of the course. As a newbie, you're likely to think that you can cover much more than you will actually be able to. If you have dates on the syllabus, students will think you're behind if you cover the material more slowly, which you're likely to do. Without dates, you can more seamlessly edit the syllabus as you go along to bring it down to a scope you can actually cover.

I've been teaching for a very long time, and I still hand out detailed syllabi with no dates.

[Orin Kerr]

I do it differently than Mary. I have a full syllabus with all 39 classes on it: Each class is described in a paragraph or two, that describes the subject, goals, and purpose of that class. I use class numbers (12, 13) instead of dates because schedule changes happen (a class might get cancelled, there might be a snow day, etc.), but I maintain the schedule as it appears in the syllabus.

One key to doing that is to have a sense of the pace you bring to a class. For example, my natural teaching style is to cover two cases, usually about 15 pages of reading, for each 55 minute class. I might start with a 5 or 10 minute introduction, in which I discuss the history and context of the subject and review the black letter law. I then turn to the first case, and spend 20 minutes on it; then the second case, and spend 20 minutes on it; and then spend the last 5-10 minutes with a review, some practical or theoretical tips, and taking questions. Once you have a sense of your timing, you can assign coverage on a per-class basis by knowing the number of pages and cases you want to cover. (I should add that 15 pages is an average; it might be 10 pages for new 1Ls and 20 pages for 3Ls.)

[Howard Katz]

Yes to Tim regarding the exam. Newbies want to stuff additional issues into an essay question. Instead, they should be "de-contenting" 9to use a word from the auto industry of the '80s) - taking some issues off the table, removing that fourth essay that won't change anyone's grade after the first three, etc.

As for the syllabus, I tend to agree with Mary's position. The first time through the course, it's hard for a rookie to know how quickly they will go. And if you fall short of the detailed syllabus pace, either students think there is something wrong with them or with you. It also creates artificial pressure on the prof to move forward, even if you aren't sure you've completed your teaching of a topic. An experienced prof can do what Orin suggests - but the first time through it's tougher to anticipate pace. But if you don't put class numbers or dates, it is extremely important to have your own idea of where you should be, and to check against it and adjust accordingly.

Having said that, I will say that students do like more precision in the syllabus rather than less. For that matter, they prefer few deviations from the order of the book. And this is true EVEN IF you spend time explaining WHY you deviated, and EVEN IF it results in less work or greater clarity for them.

To introduce one more bit of advice for the new profs (and hopefully it isn't too late), it is very useful to try to get some overview of the whole course in prepping it. Doesn't have to be detailed - a "nutshell" or "essentials" is enough. you aren't looking for every rule; you just want to see where your course will be going, and how the pieces might fit together. Too many new profs start doing detailed prep and slog through week by week, but have no idea what topics are coming up. If you have a cursory view of the whole course, you have a better idea of when to answer a question and when to say "we'll get to that later".