The Faculty Lounge

Introducing Naming Gotham

Thank you Dan and Bridget for inviting me to step into the Faculty Lounge.  I am going to be blogging about my new book Naming Gotham: The Villains, Rogues, and Heroes Behind New York Place Names. One writing truth that I learned (relearned?) writing is that book publishers are serious about word limits. Unlike a law review article where the word limit is more of a suggestion, my publisher gave me a hard upper limit for words in the book. I ran out of space long before I ran out of words. So, I have taken to blogging because there are more stories I want to tell.

First let me introduce the project.  Then in subsequent blog posts, I will share some of the stories and details that I had to cut from the book because of space constraints.

About Naming Gotham

Each day, millions of people “take” the Major Deegan, the Hutchinson Expressway, the Outerbridge Crossing, and the Holland Tunnel. Few travelers remember that, before these names became an urban shorthand for congestion, they were actual people. This quirky New York City history uses the naming of New York City’s roads, bridges, and civic institutions as a unique window into urban social structure and the City’s ever-changing inhabitants. The lives of Revolutionary War heroes, robber barons and Tammany Hall politicos introduce readers to the outsized roles that power politics, corruption, and the slave economy played and continue to play in New York City.

The names in this book tell only a small sliver of the City’s story. To date, New York City has chosen to commemorate mostly white men. In a city as diverse as New York, that fact is telling. It reflects the historical balance of power in the City—both in terms of who had the power to name things and who got to define what counts as history. As I was researching and writing this book, that began to change. Most significantly, the Shirley Chisholm State Park, named after the first Black woman elected to Congress, opened in 2019. This shift in who the City memorializes reflects the changing narrative that New Yorkers tell themselves about their city. It remains to be seen how this changing story will translate into the policies the City adopts for its schools, its roads, and its neighborhoods.

Here is the short (very funny) book trailer that artist and writer Jeff LaGreca made for Naming Gotham. 

 

Rosenblatt's Deans Database is Back!

Mississippi College School of Law Dean Emeritus Jim Rosenblatt alerted me that his Rosenblatt's Deans Database is again online after a hiatus to update the software.  The database can be viewed here.  In addition to his ever-popular details such as the length of tenure of current deans, a listing of interim deans, and the law schools they attended, he has added additional demographic data and info about deans' next stops post-deanship.  Let Jim know of any changes or updates at [email protected].

Survey Anyone? Participate in a poll of legal academics

Kevin Tobia is conducting an anonymous survey, with a graduate student collaborator, to learn more about the legal academy and legal theory. Anyone who self-identifies as a member of the “legal academy” is invited to participate. Participants might include, among others: law professors, fellows, and students; legal practitioners; and scholars from adjacent fields.

The survey has three parts: 1. Demographics; 2. Your views about which areas of law are most “central” in the legal academy; 3. Your views about substantive questions in legal theory. You are invited to take all parts of the study and are welcome to skip any questions, for any reason. The survey has obtained ethical approval and no identifying information will be retained. Details about the survey construction can be found here. The survey will close on September 1, 2021. Thank you for your help!

To take the survey, follow this link.

Let's Be Reasonable: A Conservative Case for Liberal Education

Thanks to Steve Lubet for noting my book, Let’s Be Reasonable: A Conservative Case for Liberal Education, and for inviting me to guest-blog about it.

I like Locke. Like Daniel Kahneman, albeit without a fistful of studies, John Locke reflected deeply on how the mind goes wrong. His The Conduct of the Understanding is a master class in identifying mental mistakes. Like John Stuart Mill, Locke worried especially about our one-sidedness. We “see but in part, and we know but in part, and therefore it is no wonder we conclude not right from our partial views.”

Unlike Kahneman, who looks to water cooler conversations, or the Mill of On Liberty, who looks to untrammeled freedom of thought and discussion, Locke looks to something like what we now call liberal education to overcome, as much as possible, our narrowness. As I explain in the book and here, Locke aims at “comprehensive enlargement of mind.” That requires attention to the “opposite arguings of men of parts.” It requires attention to those we imagine “come short of” us in talent. Even if we haven’t overestimated our own talent or underestimated theirs, they will know things we don’t. It requires recognition of the limits of “the science that [we] study and the books that [we] read.” It requires the study of some old books because part of our narrowness is of time, though Locke thinks the education of his time too bound to such books. It requires, where possible, travel because parochialism pertains to place.

Lockean liberal education is about more than skills or breadth. The man Locke calls the “logical chicaner”—one might think more broadly of bullshitters, spokespeople for cornered politicians, or one’s Twitter nemesis—sometimes possess these in frustrating abundance. The reasonable person at whom Locke aims is perhaps above all one who is determined to be guided by reason, rather than to use her reasoning skills to get the better of others. Locke is aware that different matters admit of different degrees of being known, but in a passage from Some Thoughts Concerning Education, with which my book opens, he sticks to the limit case in which reason spits out something like a clear answer: "There cannot be anything so . . . misbecoming . . . anyone who pretends to be a rational creature as not to yield to plain reason and the conviction of clear arguments."

Southern Illinois seeking 2-year Visitor

SIU Law is looking for a visitor (either a VAP, Visiting Associate or Full Professor) in Torts, Con. Law, Family Law, Corporations, and/or Legal Writing.  Application deadline is 6/11. The link to apply is here. And more information can be found here: Download Visiting Faculty FA21 Hire Job Posting

John Marshall Law is No More

The University of Illinois - Chicago announced yesterday that it is dropping the "John Marshall" part of its UIC-John Marshall Law School name.  (UIC's law school is unrelated to Atlanta's John Marshall Law School.)  A task force had been reviewing the issue of whether, given Marshall's involvement with slavery, his name should remain on the law school.  UIC's presser stated:

The task force report noted, “that despite Chief Justice Marshall’s legacy as one of the nation’s most significant U.S. Supreme Court justices, the newly discovered research regarding his role as a slave trader, slave owner of hundreds of slaves, pro-slavery jurisprudence, and racist views render him a highly inappropriate namesake for the Law School.”

UIC merged with the private John Marshall Law School in 2019.  The school will now simply be known as the University of Illinois - Chicago School of Law.

 

Workshop Series: Navigating the Law Faculty Hiring Process

This just in:

The University of Denver Sturm College of Law’s Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, the Society of American Law Teachers (SALT), and LatCrit (Latina and Latino Critical Legal Theory Inc.) collaboratively present a workshop series, “Navigating the 2021-2022 Law Faculty Hiring Process” to be held virtually during summer and fall 2021. The series is designed to support candidates from historically underrepresented groups as they prepare for the 2021-2022 law school faculty hiring cycle for textbook (“doctrinal”) positions and/or clinical faculty positions, as well as one session dedicated to legal writing. Faculty and deans from law schools across the country will provide specific tips, insights, and strategies on the faculty hiring process. Depending on the number of attendees, participants may engage in one-on-one/small group conversations. Free registration is required for each session. All sessions will be held 9am PST/10am MST/11am Central/12pm EST. Below are the workshops:

How to Best Maximize Your Summer to Prepare for Fall Hiring – June 8, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZApcO6urzovE9T2oe-SAV0xUb4I4rAQGlrb
The season for law faculty hiring is around the corner. Get advice on how to best utilize the summer months.
Featuring: Prof. Gautam Hans (Vanderbilt); Prof. Nancy Leong (Denver); Dean/Prof. Angela Onwuachi-Willig (Boston)

The Legal Writing Hiring Market – June 16, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZUpcumqqz0uGd1UdBdVwRM5YvP0rrS7ENrX
Join this session if you are interested in legal writing positions to get distinct and specific job market advice.
Featuring: Prof. Nantiya Ruan (Denver); Others TBA

Navigating the FAR Form – June 23, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZckfuCsqjIvEtC0FG0LC8VqkTHR3CyJxNuh
The Faculty Appointments Registry Form, also known as the FAR Form, is the primary application and formal route for entry into legal academia. Learn about the components of the standard FAR and the dos and don’ts of completing the form. Understand how to market yourself by showing how your life experience, education, and legal background effectively translate into the three pillars of teaching, service, and scholarship.
Featuring: Prof. Alina Ball (UC Hastings); Prof. Jasmine Harris (UC Davis); Prof. Catherine Smith (Denver)

Preparing for the AALS Faculty Recruitment Conference, Even Virtually – August 4, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0tcOipqDovGtRg9iF7gWrPxkzr1lKFHGin
Understand how to stand out and succeed in the 30-minute AALS Faculty Recruitment interviews.
Featuring: Prof. Audra Savage (Wake Forest); Prof. Robin Walker Sterling (Northwestern); Prof. Kyle Velte (Kansas)

Preparing for the Callback – August 17, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZYrdeitqz8iHdL5npabQ9W4jDyYnD9LNY4t
The day-long callback, whether remote or in person, can be both exhilarating and exhausting. Learn about who you are likely to meet, the questions you should ask, and how to prepare for “the job talk.”
Featuring: Prof. Anita Sinha (American); Prof. Bertrall Ross (Berkeley); Prof. Daiquiri Steele (Alabama)

Job Offers, Negotiations, & Decisions – December 6, 2021
Register: https://udenver.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZAoc-Chrj0uHtbMVhdSWDfQ6zAshSWy8GHm
Getting a job offer is great, but how to think about your best fit and how to navigate multiple offers takes time and preparation. Hear insights on what to ask for and when, and how to decide aligned with your goals, values, and the law school community you would like to join.
Featuring: Prof. Valena Beety (ASU); Vice Dean/Prof. Rose Cuison-Villazor (Rutgers); Dean/Prof. José (Beto) R. Juárez (Nova)

Sad News from CWRU Law: Passing of Professor Peter Gerhart

I'm very sad to share the following from CWRU Law School: Former law school dean and professor Peter Gerhart passed away over the weekend. More information about Peter and his work and legacy are on the CWRU website: https://thedaily.case.edu/remembering-professor-and-former-dean-peter-gerhart/.

Hiring Announcement: PittLaw

The University of Pittsburgh School of Law invites applications from lateral candidates (candidates who are currently serving as faculty members) for several full-time, tenure-stream faculty positions at the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor beginning in the 2021-2022 academic year. Candidates should have a J.D. or equivalent degree. The School of Law is specifically looking for candidates from any area of research/specialization who are interested in being part of university-wide initiatives aimed to quickly advance Pitt’s expertise in Latinx Studies and Race and Social Determinants of Equity and Well-Being.

The School of Law is located on the main campus of the University of Pittsburgh, one of the nation’s top public research universities, close to state and federal courts, major corporate headquarters, and local, national, and international law firms. The University is one of the anchor institutions of Pittsburgh, a city that has enjoyed a remarkable transformation and continues to reinvent itself as a world-class center of education, medicine, and technology.

The University of Pittsburgh is an Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer. In furtherance of our strong institutional commitment to a diverse faculty, we particularly welcome applications from those who are members of underrepresented groups and others who would bring diverse ideas and perspectives to our community. Recruitment is subject to approval by the University’s Provost.  

Contact: Professor Jessie Allen, Chair, Faculty Appointments Committee, University of Pittsburgh School of Law, 3900 Forbes Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15260. Email: [email protected]. Email submissions are preferred. Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis until the positions are filled, beginning on January 19, 2021.

Peking University School of Transnational Law Seeking Faculty

Peking University School of Transnational Law (“STL”) invites applications for lateral and entry-level tenure track faculty whose scholarly and teaching interests include antitrust, competition law, or intellectual property law.  Joint appointments are possible for established scholars.

STL is the only law school in the world to offer an integrated dual degree program that includes an American Law J.D., taught in English, and a China law Juris Master (J.M.), taught largely in Chinese.  STL is located on Peking University's Shenzhen Campus, minutes from Hong Kong.  Peking University is one of the world's leading research universities, ranked 23rd worldwide in THE.   Shenzhen is renowned as China’s leading center of technological innovation, advanced financial services and internationalization, home to such innovative giants as Tencent, Huawei, BGI, Ping An, BYD, and DJI Drones.  

STL values diversity and inclusion and is committed to both in appointing, mentoring and retaining faculty.

Inquiries should be addressed to Professor Nitzan Shilon, Chair, Faculty Appointments Committee, at [email protected]. 

Law and Society Association Announces Call for Nominees for Prizes and Awards

The Law and Society Association is soliciting nominations for various awards for scholarship in the field of law and society. The awards will be presented at the Annual Meeting.  More info available on the LSA homepage here.

Below the fold is a list of all the prizes.  

I served as chair of one of the prize committees last year comprised of diverse group of international scholars. Our committee really did read all of the submissions with care, so please consider nominating yourself or a colleague! (Some prizes require that nominators be LSA members; 2020 or 2021 memberships count for this purpose.)

Frank Wu is President of Queens College

Normally these posting are in the future tense, but I have to plead guilty to missing this one completely!  Frank Wu, former chancellor and dean of Hastings Law, took up a new job this summer leading CUNY's Queens College.  That makes two CUNY presidents emerging from the ranks of law school deans.  Michelle Anderson, president of Brooklyn College, formerly helmed CUNY Law.  

Results of Law Professor Twitter Census 2020-2021 Edition - 9/17/20

Below the fold are the results of the 2020-2021 Law Professor Twitter Census. You can also download the raw data here. The list includes areas of academic interest, for faculty who self-identified with that information. The list is arranged by school, instead of individual users' last names.

Of the 1368 faculty members on this list, 759 (55.4%) are male; 609 (44.5%) are female; 1024 (78.9%) are affiliated with U.S.-based law schools; 262 (19.2%) are affiliated with law schools outside the U.S.

Here are responses to some anticipated questions from inquiring minds who want to know:

1. How was the census developed?

The list is based on previous censuses, conducted in 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2019. It was amended and updated by contributions from blog readers in response to this post. I added additional or deleted very few names myself, based on law prof accounts that I have happened to encounter (typically because they follow me on Twitter or I follow them) or if I knew someone had changed schools, left the academy, etc. I made no concerted effort to update the list myself.

2. How accurate is the census?

Not at all. If there are corrections, additions, etc., please feel free to email me directly at bcrawford at law dot pace dot edu.  I'll republish from time to time based on new data I receive, but likely not until next year.

3. Why isn't my information listed in the census? Why isn't my colleague's information listed?

The census relies almost exclusively on self-identification. To be included in the list, you had to actively add yourself to it (as indicated here.

4. How does this year's data compare to the numbers from prior years?

For an historical comparison, here's the data from prior years:

	2020-2021 Version (9/17/20)	2019-2020 Version (9/13/19)	2018-2019 Version (8/15/2018)	2015 Version (1/23/2015)	2012 Version (7/26/2012)
Total  Number Users	1368	1310	1105	553	204
Male	759	709	636	330	142
Female	609	601	469	223	62

It looks to me like the number of law professors using Twitter has reached a leveling-off point. My sense is that those who are interested in the medium have adopted it and we won’t see big increases in numbers in future years.

5. Who is included in the census?

The list is meant to cover only individual tweeters who are full-time faculty members at law schools.  The list is not meant to be a comprehensive account of everyone (adjuncts, librarians, practitioners, programs, institutes, students, group blogs) publishing law-related tweets. Consistent with past practice, emeritus faculty are included in the census.

6. What good is this information?

Either not at all or not much.  It might be a handy reference for quickly finding someone's Twitter handle, but I don't put any stock in the completeness or "meaning" of the info.

Law Professor Twitter Census 2020-2021 Edition - Call for Entries, Corrections, Revisions by 9/15

If you'd like to be listed in the semi-regular census of law professor Twitter users (or confirm that you are listed already), please read on.

It’s been about one year since the last Law Prof Twitter Census here at the Lounge. (Prior surveys are here (2012), here (2012), here (2015),  here (2018) and here (2019).

As with prior versions, the list is meant to cover individual law professor tweeters only (not accounts of groups, programs, blogs, law schools, print publications, students, practitioners, staff).  Folks should be full-time law school faculty members (not, say, law-trained profs working in business schools).  Law profs outside the U.S. very, very welcome. Anonymous and pseudonymous accounts are not eligible for inclusion.

The downloadable, sortable spreadsheet can be edited directly by accessing this link. If you’d like to add your name, or if you would like to add to or modify your existing listing in census, the census calls for:

(a) Your name

(b) Your Twitter handle

(c) Your school affiliation

(d) Up to three subject-matter areas of interest that related to your teaching, scholarship or tweeting.

Here are customary responses to some anticipated questions from inquiring minds who want to know:

1.  How was the census developed?

The list is based on previous censuses. I have added additional or deleted very few names myself, based on law prof accounts that I have happened to encounter (typically because they follow me on Twitter or I follow them) or if I knew someone had changed schools, left the academy, etc. I have made no concerted effort to update the list myself.

2.  How accurate is the census?

Not at all. If there are corrections, additions, etc., please feel free to make them directly to the spreadsheet.  As a last resort, you can email me directly at bcrawford at law dot pace dot edu.  The deadline for changes is September 15, 2020, 5pm eastern. I'll republish again shortly thereafter, and then not again until next year, most likely.

3. Why isn't my information listed in the census? Why isn't my colleague's information listed?

The census relies almost exclusively on self-identification. To be included in the list, you must actively add yourself to it.

You can view the current list embedded below, too.

If you'd like to be listed in the semi-regular census of law professor Twitter users (or confirm that you are listed already), please read on.

It’s been about one year since the last Law Prof Twitter Census here at the Lounge. (Prior surveys are here (2012), here (2012), here (2015),  here (2018) and here (2019).

As with prior versions, the list is meant to cover individual law professor tweeters only (not accounts of groups, programs, blogs, law schools, print publications, students, practitioners, staff).  Folks should be full-time law school faculty members (not, say, law-trained profs working in business schools).  Law profs outside the U.S. very, very welcome. Anonymous and pseudonymous accounts are not eligible for inclusion.

The downloadable, sortable spreadsheet can be edited directly by accessing this link. If you’d like to add your name, or if you would like to add to or modify your existing listing in census, the census calls for:

(a) Your name

(b) Your Twitter handle

(c) Your school affiliation

(d) Up to three subject-matter areas of interest that related to your teaching, scholarship or tweeting.

Here are customary responses to some anticipated questions from inquiring minds who want to know:

1.  How was the census developed?

The list is based on previous censuses. I have added additional or deleted very few names myself, based on law prof accounts that I have happened to encounter (typically because they follow me on Twitter or I follow them) or if I knew someone had changed schools, left the academy, etc. I have made no concerted effort to update the list myself.

2.  How accurate is the census?

Not at all. If there are corrections, additions, etc., please feel free to make them directly to the spreadsheet.  As a last resort, you can email me directly at bcrawford at law dot pace dot edu.  The deadline for changes is September 15, 2020, 5pm eastern. I'll republish again shortly thereafter, and then not again until next year, most likely.

3. Why isn't my information listed in the census? Why isn't my colleague's information listed?

The census relies almost exclusively on self-identification. To be included in the list, you must actively add yourself to it.

You can view the current list embedded below, too.

The Law School Industry - Law and Technology @ US Law Schools

Digital technologies are an increasingly important phenomena in higher education and professional industries. Law schools have started to participate in rethinking how to train the next generation workforce/citizens at the interface of governance/technology. This post includes links to quantitative data for folks interested to learn more about the current law/tech situation in US legal higher education, and provides a few initial thoughts about the data. 

Here is an excel sheet formatted study with a wide range of data on current US law school efforts around 'Law and Technology': Download US Law and Technology Higher Education Law Schools - Haskell:Fish In addition, for an alternative visualisation for some of the information, see: https://app.flourish.studio/visualisation/2736840 

Note: The study was developed along with a PhD student, Jessica L. Fish, and funded by the University of Manchester Law School and its Law and Technology Initiative. Scholarship based partly on this data will be rolled out in the coming year, but the information provided is meant to be open sources/common for any colleagues however useful. 

A Few Thoughts... (see below)

Women, Gender & the Law Emerging Scholar Award: Call for Submissions

Bumping this to the front in anticipation of the July 1, 2020 deadline.

The Elisabeth Haub School of Law is pleased to announce the competition for its inaugural Women, Gender & the Law Emerging Scholar Award.  This paper competition is open to all full-time law professors with five (5) or fewer years of full-time law teaching experience as of July 1, 2020. The deadline for submissions is July 1, 2020.

The purpose of the award is to encourage and recognize excellent legal scholarship related to women, gender and the law.  The work chosen for the Women, Gender & the Law Emerging Scholar Award should make a substantial contribution to legal literature and reflect original research and/or major developments in previously reported research.

Papers will be reviewed on a blind basis by a committee comprised of four members of the Haub Law faculty with expertise in this area: Bridget Crawford, Darren Rosenblum, Noa Ben-Asher and Emily Gold Waldman.  The winner of the competition will be invited to present the paper to selected students and faculty at Haub Law (located in White Plains, NY) during the 2020-2021 academic year, with reasonable travel expenses paid.

ELIGIBILITY:

• All persons who have held full-time teaching positions for five (5) or fewer full academic years as of July 1, 2020 are eligible for consideration.
• There is no subject-matter limitation for submissions, as long as the paper relates in some way to women, gender, and the law.
• Jointly authored papers are accepted as long as each author independently meets the eligibility requirements.

PUBLICATION COMMITMENTS/LIMITATIONS:

• There is no publication commitment associated with the competition. 
• Papers are eligible regardless of whether they were published prior to submission date, are scheduled to be published after the submission date, or are not yet under submission.
• Each applicant is limited to one (1) entry.
• There are no page-length or word-count limitations.
• All publications (including scholarly articles, book chapters, legal briefs and other writings) are eligible for consideration.

SUBMISSION:

• We will accept submissions for the Emerging Scholar Award from April 1, 2020, through July 1, 2020. The winner will be announced by August 30, 2020.
• To participate, please email your article, redacted as necessary to preserve anonymity (for the blind grading process), as a portable data file (PDF) to Judy Jaeger, Senior Staff Associate, at [email protected] with the subject line “Emerging Scholar Award.”
• Please include in the body of the email your name, institutional affiliation and confirmation that you meet the eligibility requirements.
• Unredacted papers will not be considered.

Information on Emerging Scholar Award and the Elisabeth Haub School of Law

This is the inaugural year of the Elisabeth Haub School of Law’s Women, Gender & the Law Emerging Scholar Award.  The law school at Pace University is one of a small number of schools in the United States named after a woman, and we are proud of our school’s long-standing commitment to gender justice.

Since the establishment of the Women’s Justice Center in 1991, Haub Law has made gender justice a priority.  Students have the ability to pursue a concentration in Women, Gender & the Law, through which they develop skills and strategies for effective representation and advocacy for gender justice, regardless of what career they pursue.  The Haub Law faculty includes nationally-recognized academic experts and advocates for gender justice. Our faculty teach, research and write about gender equality and justice as it relates to constitutional law, corporate law, criminal law, education, environmental law, estate planning, juvenile justice, legal theory, poverty, public health, social media, and taxation, to name just a few areas.  An important hallmark of Haub Law is that in addition to our specialty classes that focus on gender, issues involving gender are also integrated into a wide range of other courses.

Virtual Law and Society: A Response to Bridget Crawford

I was asked by the leadership of the Law and Society Association to post this letter responding to Bridget Crawford's posts about the LSA conference here and here.  That seems fair and here it is:

-------------------------------

We’re writing as the president, immediate past president and 2020 program co-chairs of the Law and Society Association to set the record straight about this year’s Law and Society Annual Meeting. Unfortunately, a number of Professor Bridget Crawford’s representations of LSA’s actions in her posts on the Faculty Lounge Blog are inaccurate.

The Law and Society Association’s Board of Trustees recently decided to cancel the annual in-person meeting which had been scheduled for late May, as have all other professional associations we know. But the Board didn’t want to lose the opportunity to bring our LSA community together as much as we could, so the Board decided at the same time to convert the in-person meeting into a virtual conference instead. We notified conference attendees as soon as the decision was made to replace an in-person meeting with a virtual one, so that they would know as much as we did, even though we didn’t have all plans in place for what the virtual conference would look like. We understand that the lack of concrete information has generated many questions among persons considering whether to not to participate in the virtual meeting, but we are working as fast as we can to provide more detail. We are all facing an unprecedented situation in which we all learning new technologies at a moment’s notice, and the Law and Society Association is no different. We ask for your patience as we feel our way in this new environment.

Let us tell you what we know so far.

ON REFUNDS: At the time that LSA made the announcement to go virtual, everyone who wanted to withdraw from the virtual conference was invited to do so and promised a full refund of the initial conference registration fee. That full refund offer still stands. The LSA office will refund all cancellations and, as of the week of 6 April, had already done so with all requests received by then. If a backlog of requests develops, the office will work to process and fulfil them as soon as possible. We hope that our conference attendees will recognize that an office staff of four people is processing numerous and varied requests relating to a meeting of nearly 2500 registrants, at the same time that it is gearing up to create a new program in a completely new format. We ask for your patience, but assure you that full refunds will be issued for those who choose not to join us in virtuality.

What is Law & Society's Refund Policy, Exactly?

Now that Law & Society has announced it is going to a virtual conference, many people are pulling out because they do not want to pay $250 to $390 to participate in a series of Zoom web meetings ("comments" and a "chat function" are LSA selling points). Some schools simply won't reimburse for it. 

LSA announced its refund policy here:

If you have registered for the in-person Annual Meeting and you choose to join the virtual meeting, we will honor your registration and you will not need to register again. However, if you wish to request a refund of your registration fee and not participate in the virtual meeting, we will provide a full refund and your paper will be dropped from the program, but you must fill out the refund form by April 15th. The link to the cancellation form is below -- you will have to login to your LSA profile first to fill out a form.

I am critical (here) of the decision by LSA leadership, with no consultation of its members, to charge a full conference registration fee for a virtual conference. I understand the organization relies on revenue from the annual meeting. But I don't think extending a ham fist is the way to go.

I'm further distressed to hear from three separate people that they have not been able to get full refunds from LSA despite timely completion of the refund form. Instead, registrants are receiving emails saying that they cannot receive a refund unless they are members of LSA or that over $190 of their registration fee will be retained, without further explanation.  At least one person reports sending multiple emails before getting a full refund. The other two have not been fully refunded.

To me, this is more than just bungling on LSA's part. It's fraud.

LSA should move swiftly to grant a full refund to all who have requested it.

@SSRN Categorizers Can’t Recognize a Scholarly Article When They See One

I have previously lamented (here) SSRN’s arbitrary determination of “scholarly” merit. SSRN has inconsistent and unevenly applied rules for what does (and does not) qualify as a “scholarly paper.” That’s a determination with consequence: papers that don’t meet SSRN’s idiosyncratic rules are not “publicly available” and thus will not be accessible on the author’s page on SSRN. The paper is rendered invisible on the SSRN platform (although one can land on the paper through an internet search).

Brian Frye (@brianlfrye) has yet again posted a paper that SSRN inexplicably treats as non-scholarly. Illegitimacy of Plagiarism Norms has an unusual (but enticing) abstract. Click through to the paper and it is… well, a traditional scholarly paper. What gives, SSRN?

The treatment of Professor Frye’s paper by SSRN suggests to me that SSRN classifiers are not actually clicking through to the papers submitted. Professor Frye’s paper is far from anything that SSRN considers a “non-scholarly” paper: work that is an “editorial or opinion paper;” “opinion, advocacy, or satire;” “data tables, summary book reviews, opinion, advocacy and satirical papers.”

SSRN's (arbitary) classfication of some papers as “scholarly” and others as “non-scholarly” and the attendant exclusion of "non-scholarly" papers from an author's publicly-available page do not serve SSRN’s stated mission (here) of providing “rapid worldwide distribution of research to authors and their readers and to facilitate communication among them at the lowest possible cost.” But then again, I’m biased.  SSRN has classified several of my papers (here, here and here, for example) as non-scholarly (and thus non-discoverable from my author page). I have sour grapes.

While we’re on the subject of unusual abstracts, Brian Frye’s new co-authored piece with Maybell Romero (Northern Illinois), The Right to Unmarry: A Proposal, has my all-time favorite abstract. No spoilers. Click through to read a beautiful, happy, joyful abstract to an undoubtedly scholarly paper. SSRN, do the right thing.

More Online Teaching Resources

To add to the current compilation of materials on how to move to remote teaching, I wanted to share the following SSRN links.

The first was posted this week by Prof Agnieszka McPeak (Duquesne) and is a straightforward, simple best practices guide to moving things online. Six pages, easy to read and great advice:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3553094

The second is a piece I wrote last year which is longer and focuses more on the costs and benefits of law schools moving to online teaching, but it also includes some practical observations on larger and smaller group teaching online:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3491427

Hopefully some of those struggling to get online quickly may make use of these pieces. I highly recommend Prof McPeak's thoughts.

 

University of Iowa Reinstates Faculty Fellows Program

From our friends at the University of Iowa College of Law:

The University of Iowa College of Law is delighted to announce that it is reinstituting its Faculty Fellow program. Our program alums include Devon Carbado, Laura Beny, Cyndi Nance, Creola Johnson, Angela Gilmore, Sumi Cho, and Harold Rocha, among others.  We are specifically seeking candidates from diverse backgrounds. Please pass the word to your networks.  See the details at:

https://law.uiowa.edu/iowa-law-faculty-fellowship.