Abstract
Most every law school right now is thinking about its curriculum. The Carnegie Report certainly was a big factor in spurring that, although curricular reform is something that law schools, of course, are always engaged in. It moves at a glacial pace sometimes. One of the things that really struck us here at Seattle University, as everyone started to talk about Carnegie and started to talk about curricular reform, is that it was, frankly, a bit of old news to us. Seattle University School of Law has always prided itself on being at the forefront of legal education in many ways, and one of them is that we’ve always had an incredibly robust clinic, legal writing programs, and trial advocacy programs. The idea that we need to be more focused on the whole person, not only cognitive learning but the other dimensions of learning, was something that we’ve been working at for some time.
It certainly has struck me, during all those conversations, that one of the things missing was the question of what materials we were going to use to do this teaching. As we all recognize, what happens in the classroom is a chemical sort of reaction, where the mix is based on the students, on the professor, and the materials, including the format in which those materials are presented. To take these conversations to the next level, this is a topic that we really needed to address, and so it is most fitting, I think, that it is here. .
Recommended Citation
Edward Rubin, Kellye Testy, Ronald Collins, and David M. Skover, Transcript: Workshop on the Future of the Legal Course Book, 33 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 292 (2010).
