Monday, October 29, 2007
Traditional Dress
I have made a change to our invitations. I have asked that for every event where we request business attire or black-tie, we also make an explicit note of “or traditional dress.” Such traditional dress might include, for example, a burka. Although some have suggested that anyone who prefers traditional dress will come so attired without being given permission to do so, I believe it is important to signal to them that they are welcome – and, more than that, to indicate to everyone that all are welcomed on equal terms. While I am quite assimilated as a native-born citizen, and I have never been accustomed to anything other than modern Western clothing, I have tried to remember how common it was for immigrants to be casually humiliated as well as to set a new ideal of inclusion.
Time Management
There are many skills lawyers need that we fail to mention much less develop in the formal educational process. Among the most crucial is time management. Especially for lawyers who bill by the hour, it is crucial to become as organized as possible. There are various techniques for doing so that are popular: touching each piece of paper once, taking care of email messages immediately as they come in, the entire “GTD” protocol, and so on. There also is the cliché no less worth repeating: technology by and large does not improve the basic structure of one’s life; a PDA may automate a person’s habits, but it will do only that. It is scarcely worth giving advice, because almost everyone with responsibility already knows what must be done to avoid procrastination and follow up reliably. Each of us must make choices, recognizing that they are choices: choosing priorities and turning down opportunities to ensure commitments that are made are fulfilled.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Faculty
I joined members of the faculty Appointments Committee at the annual Faculty Recruitment Conference this week. It is at this event that law schools interview prospective professors. Most of the entry-level teachers who are hired come through this process.
While there, I noted to the candidates the tremendous strength of our current faculty. The three professors who were there on behalf of our Law School are typical in their productivity. Each is a terrific scholar in his/her own field. Professor Peter Henning, Chair of the Appointments Committee this year, just published a co-authored teaching text entitled Global Issues in Criminal Law. Professor Erica Beecher-Monas, who joined us as a lateral hire from another institution, just published a major academic study of scientific evidence, with Cambridge University Press. Professor Noah Hall, who is still new to the profession, has joined one of the leading environmental law casebooks as an editor. All of them also write law review articles, in addition to fulfilling their responsibilities in the classroom and through institutional service.
The breadth and depth of this work is quite remarkable. I am proud to lead such a group of thinkers.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Broken Window
I want to assure everyone that the central administration of
Wayne State University is aware of and is working on replacing the broken
window in our building entryway. The window is a custom-made unit, and it may
take some time for this to be taken care of. We have asked that the matter be
expedited.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
How Do You Know?
Lawyers are different from other people. One of the distinctions between lawyers and other people is that lawyers always insist on not only knowing but also knowing how you know. Whether it is with respect to the law or the facts, a good lawyer will always insist on asking his colleagues no less than his adversaries: what is the basis for the argument or assertion; what is your precedent or your proof? This is a crucial aspect of legal practice. It can be do collegially, even politely; it must, however, be done.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Publicity
This time of the year, law school deans are inundated with promotional materials from virtually every school in the nation – glossy, thick, well-produced periodicals, hardcover books, and trinkets ranging from bookmarks to mugs to flashlights to loupes, emblazoned with logos and slogans. Most deans likely take no more than a moment to glance at these items, long enough to be impressed by the cost rather than the substance. Nonetheless, much as law firms have had to market themselves as businesses, so too law schools have no choice but to compete. We are locked into the ratcheting effect of the exercise. Just as law firms have had to raise associate salaries to maintain their rank even if it is barely rational for their clients to pay the resulting billing rates, law schools must constantly strive to outdo their peers.
So it is no longer enough to be good; one must ensure others are aware of how good one believes oneself to be. Evolutionary psychologists who study human nature would counsel us that, even if these efforts have no intrinsic value, they convey information: the school that can afford to spend vast sums of money on advertising is sending at least the message that it has those vast sums of money at its disposal.
I recently received a message from another law school dean. I admire his decision. He said he would refrain from participating in this frenzy, preferring to invest institutional resources “toward scholarshops and educational programming.” Of course, he is no fool. He did wish to inform his peers “of recent developments” at his school. To do so, he relied on digital versions of the same publications that otherwise would have been distributed in hard copy at great cost. He also has been a pioneer in academic blogging. His very declaration of principle ironically has positive PR value.
We do our best to distinguish ourselves on the merits, first and foremost, without neglecting the importance of marketing. We are preparing a series of flyers that target specific types of potential students: out-of-state; highly-credentialed; non-traditional; and so on. We also are developing a series of brochures on the areas in which we boast exceptional strength: health law, international law, intellectual property, tax, among others.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Legal Research and Writing
The legal research and writing course is perhaps the most important aspect of the first year curriculum, because it spans all the remainder of the curriculum and provides the foundation upon which everything else depends. One of the crucial lessons of the course is that the best lawyer reads everything for herself, anew and with care, rather than relying on summaries or memories -- or others. Laypeople (and lazy lawyers) often describe statutes, regulations, and case law, sometimes with a fair amount of accuracy. Even a good summary is still a summary, a memory a memory.
Yet what is crucial is the precise language and the entire text. There are cases that turn literally on a comma, or the difference between “and,” “or” and “and/or.” A lawyer must know the law to apply it, and one must look with care at the words to see ambiguities that allow for argument. Even a senior lawyer who is experienced depends on a more junior lawyer whom she has trained at her peril: it is why supervisors seem so demanding in legal practice, because they must know not only what a person knows but how they have come to know it (about which more later).
If nothing else persuades you to do your own work, consider your client. After all, your client is paying your bill because she would like your expertise – not your reliance on someone else’s opinion.
Friday, October 12, 2007
What a Dean Does: Service
Traditionally faculty are evaluated on their research, teaching, and service. Although there are different levels of emphasis on each aspect of this triad depending on institutional missions that vary among schools, this basic understanding of the role of academics is standard. For administrators such as deans, there is much less demand for research or teaching but there remain considerable expectations for service other than the ordinary day-to-day responsibilities of the position. For example, deans at Wayne State University contribute formally and informally to the central administration processes that govern the university as a whole and to units other than their own. Law school deans typically participate in the activities of the bench and the bar, both locally and nationally: for example, by speaking at conferences and serving on AALS and ABA Committees.
These forms of pro bono service are intrinsically worthwhile. They also benefit the institution indirectly, through the publicity and goodwill that are generated, the contacts that are made (which may lead, for instance, to employment opportunities for students or donations from unexpected new supporters), and the professional development of the dean himself. To a large extent, there also is an expectation that deans will perform enough of this volunteer work that the self-regulating system of higher education is able to function; it is a responsibility because each school itself eventually benefits from the cooperation.
Along these lines, one of the tasks I will undertake this semester is being a member of an ABA accreditation site visit team that will inspect another law school. This is one of the most important forms of service deans perform. The inspection involves every aspect of a law school, from the faculty and the students to the library and the physical facilities. Before the team arrives, a big box of background materials is distributed to it documenting as much as possible. During the site visit, which runs from Sunday to Wednesday, the team interviews representatives of every constituency group. The team then generates a comprehensive written report that it considered and relied upon heavily by the ABA Council that makes the actual decision as to accreditation. Almost all law schools successfully pass the basic test and remain ABA approved. Many of them, however, are subjected to report-back conditions.
As you may know from an earlier post to this blog, the ABA accredits law schools and it conducts an inspection every seven years of any given law schools. Thus, about 1/7 of the 185 or so law schools is scheduled for an inspection in any given year; basically, an inspection occurs every week during the academic year. Our turn is coming up in a year and a half, so much of what is learned behind-the-scenes about the process will directly benefit us.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Professor Bambauer
I congratulate Professor Derek Bambauer on his victory in the annual Ambulance Chase. An expert on intellectual property whom we were fortunate to have been able to hire from a fellowship at Harvard, Professor Bambauer proves his athletic prowess once again. At the “Whack Wu” fencing competition last year, he was a formidable foe on the piste after a single lesson.
I also commend everyone who organized and participated in this wonderful event.
Obscenity
I just realized how effective obscenity and foul language in general can be, if it is used rarely.
I recently saw the movie “Idiocracy.” Directed by Mike Judge, the creator of the MTV Beavis and Butthead characters, this satire, starring Luke Wilson and Maya Rudolph, depicts a dystopia that of course is meant to be didactic. In the future, the entire population of the United States has been reduced to idiocy. Wilson and Rudolph’s characters, selected for an Army experiment in hibernation because they are as average as possible, are reawakened and find themselves the smartest people alive. Among the many examples of the degradation of society is the constant use of the extended middle finger as essentially a means of emphasis. It has lost all meaning.
I also just attended an important meeting. In a board room setting, with a formal agenda of discussion topics, and virtually all attendees in business attire, one of my colleagues wanted to make a point especially emphatically. In the course of his remarks, he said that the contrary argument was “bullshit.” Although it was an unusually strong comment, it was effective exactly because any term such as that likely had not been uttered in that context within the memory of anyone present. If this individual, or any of us, regularly swore, we would cease to be impressed by it.
As we train people in advocacy and leadership, I am reminded constantly of how important words are and how much others, too, are aware of our language choices. Attorneys are successful because they are able to use language better than most others; the best among us invariably become public figures in some sense. We have a responsibility in our communications, to respect ourselves and our audiences – our effectiveness depends on it.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Reunions
Our reunion this past Saturday was a wonderful success, thanks to the efforts of the Advancement Office, especially Frank Castronova, and many volunteers from the different years who formed committees to encourages their classmates to come. Two hundred people RSVP’d, which is more than twice the usual turnout. They enjoyed tailgating at the homecoming football game, tours of campus, and dinner with entertainment.
It is always terrific to see our alumni visit campus, recalling their experiences, marveling at the changes, and renewing acquaintances. It is crucial for us to foster a sense of stakeholding, so that the people whom we have trained continue to feel a meaningful tie to the institution. Like any other relationship, this takes work.
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Speaking
I make a living by speaking. Lawyers and teachers do that, and law teachers do that especially. I am flattered that from time to time different organizations will invite me to make public presentations. I enjoy doing so, and I believe many others would as well if they had a better sense of how to do it.
Most people fear public speaking more than they do anything else, including death. So oratorical ability, while perhaps not as prized as it was in the classical Athens that invented democracy, is still a highly valuable skill well worth cultivating.
Perhaps the most important advice I have to offer is that public speaking skill is actually less important than substantive knowledge. That may seem contrary. After all, it seems that leading public figures are able to address any subject, even on an impromptu basis. To be clear, I am saying that public speaking – advocacy – requires genuine understanding of the subject; I’m not referring to acting, using someone else’s script (which is a distinct art I admire greatly). Without an excellent background in the subject, meaning much more than could be disclosed during any presentation, very few of us would have the ability and the confidence to say much that is meaningful and deserving of the attention of large groups for sustained periods. As you study how to speak, study something worth saying.
Then I would repeat the stock advice. Take every opportunity to practice. If you aspire to excellence, you must dedicate yourself to the task. Until it becomes impossible to do so, accept every invitation: unless it has become impossible to say yes in a responsible manner, consider no audience too modest.
For your own intellectual development, develop new material. Even the most articulate persons rely on some favorite stories. Few of us display the ability of the late Robert Kennedy, speaking the night the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated in Indianapolis, delivering a eulogy that was at once heartfelt and profound. Yet it is important to take risks, integrating original lines suited to the occasion with text well-rehearsed with hard experience. Most listeners will know the difference, and few of them will appreciate rote recitation.
Develop structure. A classic outline structure, described explicitly at the beginning and summarized at the end, is difficult to improve on. It’s fine to use Power Point or other visual aids, especially as you start your career. But the best public speakers are old school: their words alone are compelling.
Finally, I would suggest being aware, not self-conscious, that all eyes are on you. This is true before you stand up and after you sit down. Breathing, posture, hand gestures, the blocking of movements, eye contact should all be considered. Much of the content of your communications, researchers will tell you, is non-verbal.
As a child, I was a stutterer. I grew up with parents who had foreign accents. If I can turn a phrase, you should be able to, too. As my mother said in explaining how I could learn to be fluent in Chinese: “You aren’t afraid to open your mouth and make a fool of yourself.”
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Ambulance Chase
I am pleased to once again serve as a sponsor of the Ambulance Chase. Although I am unable to attend the event, I also would like to match the generous offer made by Associate Dean David Moran. As he has typically done, he has offered to donate $20 to the charity for every student who finishes before him, plus $20 to the charity for every female student who finishes within two minutes of him. Against his interest, and mine, I encourage you to participate in this important event and make every effort to show Dean Moran that he is slowing down. Thank you to everyone who makes this student-organized activity a highlight of the year for all of us.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Judge Damon J. Keith
This weekend, I was honored to be invited to a celebration of Judge Damon J. Keith’s forty years on the federal bench. Organized by his former law clerks, the evening at the Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History was a testament to the leadership of a jurist who is committed to the city of Detroit even as he has developed a national reputation for advancing equal justice under law.
Judge Keith, whose grandfathers were slaves and who grew up under the regime of racial segregation, served his nation in the Army before completing his juris doctorate at historically black Howard University. He practiced law in Detroit, while earning an advance law degree at Wayne State University. President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Judge Keith to the United States District Court. President Jimmy Carter elevated him to the Sixth Circuit.
Judge Keith has always stood up for principle, even if his decisions are not popular. His famous wiretapping opinion, known by his name as “the Keith decision” forbade President Richard Nixon, then at the height of his popularity, from carrying out warrantless wiretaps. His desegregation of the Pontiac schools resulted in death threats. He declared “democracy dies behind closed doors” in prohibiting secret immigration hearings. He also chaired the celebration of the Constitution’s Bicentennial. In every federal courthouse, as well as every law school, there is a plaque showing the Bill of Rights, bearing Judge Keith’s name. A founder of the Detroit NAACP, he has been given the highest award by the national NAACP, the Spingarn Medal. The walls of his chambers are lined with dozens of honorary degrees and hundreds of photos of the Judge with public figures of every type over the past half century.
As impressive as Judge Keith’s career has been and continues to be, his humanity – his humility in particular – is even more important. He seems selfless in his dedication to justice. During his entire tenure, he has commanded enough respect that he has never once had to hold a lawyer in contempt. All law clerks are fond of the judges whom they serve. Judge Keith’s law clerks seem to be devoted to him. One after another, they spoke of the life lessons he imparted, both explicitly and by example. It was apparent that he had changed their lives, giving them an opportunity that they have made good on.
For me personally, I cannot think of a better reason to continue as Dean for this year than to assist the Law School in realizing a vision. The Keith Center for Civil Rights will secure our place as an institution that plays a leadership role within the legal community. It will make us one of only a handful of law schools with a center for civil rights. To be able to work together with Judge Keith is indeed transformative. His life’s work deserves to be continued forever as part of every attorney’s understanding of the obligations of the profession.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Emails and the Internet
I enjoy using email, perhaps too much so. I probably receive upwards of 200 emails per day, not including spam; I send about half that many. The people with whom I work most closely remind me from time to time how important it is to have face to face discussions, because of the limitations of email as a medium: it is tone-deaf and doesn’t allow interactive exchange; as a consequence it creates and exacerbates conflict; and it is too easy to make careless mistakes that are then distributed rather more widely than intended. By now, everyone has had the experience of a message that was meant in jest being read as if one is yelling or of having hit the send button only to regret it a moment later.
I also appreciate the internet. This blog is a form of mass communication that would have been impossible only a few years ago, and the ability to engage in it without almost no effort is a salutary development. The web gives us new powers of creative expression, allows the formation of social networks, and has the potential for changing political structures. Yet the internet also is vulnerable to abuse. Not everything that is thought should be said and the anonymity of the websites seems to encourage a level of discourse that is anything but ideal.
Taken together, email and the internet have a wonderful effect of promoting democracy and equality. I welcome that. Yet they also have consequences that are not as positive. They create a false sense of intimacy and a detrimental informality. I encourage alumni and students, for example, to feel free to send me messages. They should not hesitate to do that. But an invitation to direct access doesn’t also mean that I can or should respond to every concern raised by an alumnus or student immediately, however important it may appear to the individual or in fact turns out to be objectively. In most instances, we have an established set of procedures that has proven effective for addressing issues, and contacting me is typically not the best means of resolving problems. An analogy might be made to the very legal system in which we train advocates and counselors. It is possible to contact lawyers and judges by email. But numerous cases have emerged of the difficult situations of professional responsibility that are created by potential clients contacting lawyers and disclosing too much, and it would be wrong to expect casual interaction through electronic media with judges simply because it is technologically feasible. We have developed systems such as for civil procedure, criminal procedure, and evidence that, through experience, have proven to be better than ad hoc approaches.
I have been reflecting on these issues, because, as some of you no doubt are aware, a Wayne State University law student who was displeased with an interview experience recently saw his email message to the hiring attorney posted to a popular website for practicing lawyers. His original anger then attracted mockery from the world over. I have heard from numerous sources about this dispute. I need not say more about this, other than to observe that this individual has embarrassed not only himself but also the institution with which he will always be associated. This episode is regrettable. It need not be repeated.
State Bar
Last week I had the pleasure of attending the State Bar Annual Meeting in Grand Rapids. Our Law School always hosts a reception, and we had wonderful turnout for this important event. State Bar President Ronald D. Keefe, class of 1972, was our special guest. He delivered a few remarks on the Keith Center plans, joking that the building he had known as new was now regarded as antiquated. Everyone enjoyed themselves, reminiscing about the first year, their favorite teachers, and Circa. Professor Vincent Wellman and Development Officer Frank Castronova represented the Law School as well; Adjunct Professor Michael Shpiece also came.
