|Volume 76||Number 1||Spring 1998|
Cite as 76 Wash. U. L.Q. 293
KAREN L. TOKARZ[**]
In 1991, American Bar Association (ABA) President Sandy D'Alemberte created the ABA Coordinating Committee on Legal Education with the mandate to explore ways to expand the participation of practicing lawyers and judges in American legal education. The committee, composed of representatives from a substantial number of ABA sections and a roughly equivalent number of law school professors, focused on the role of part-time and adjunct faculty in American law schools, and published in 1993 the first edition of A Manual for Law Schools on Adjunct Faculty.
In August 1996, the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar revised the wording of ABA Law School Accreditation Standard 403(c) to underscore its commitment to the active participation of practicing lawyers and judges in legal education. In addition to reaffirming the benefits that experienced lawyers and judges might provide to law schools, the ABA also adopted Interpretation 403-1, which requires law schools to provide adjunct faculty with "orientation, guidance, monitoring, and evaluation." 
At the request of Jamienne Studley, the Chair of the 1996-97 Coordinating Committee, the 1996-97 Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Skills Training Committee collaborated to produce this second edition of the Manual in August 1997. The purpose of this Manual is to highlight steps that law schools might take to provide adjunct faculty with orientation, guidance, monitoring, and evaluation, and in the process enrich the educational program of the school. Neither committee concludes that any of the points set forth in the Manual are in any way mandatory for any institution. The purpose of the document is not regulatory, but is altogether suggestive and hortatory.
Individual law schools ultimately know best the needs and capacities of their institutions and the issues and opportunities that relate to their adjunct faculty. The prescriptions that would pertain at a school that employs a handful of adjunct teachers, for example, might not apply at a school that employs a hundred or more. The needs of adjuncts who teach alone might well vary from those who team-teach in collaboration with full-time faculty. Similarly, the issues confronting classroom adjuncts might well differ from those confronting adjuncts who teach clinical courses. The information provided in this Manual is offered merely as a starting point for discussions regarding orientation, guidance, monitoring, evaluation, and other issues relating to adjunct faculty at individual schools.
Adjunct faculty play a significant and valuable role in most law schools in this country. The addition of practitioners and experts enriches the law school curriculum and enhances the law school learning environment. Adjuncts can provide not only additional courses, but also courses in highly specialized areas where there is significant student interest and where the full-time faculty lack either interest or expertise. The practice experience of attorneys and judges commonly gives them an affirmative advantage over full-time academics in those courses with significant lawyering skills components. Adding adjunct professors to teach upperclass courses also decreases, at least slightly, the average size of other upperclass courses.
On the other hand, the indiscriminate use of adjunct faculty can pose serious pedagogical risks. For full-time practitioners, finding the considerable time required for adequate class preparation is often extremely difficult. Adjunct faculty, who are not based at the law school, also have far less opportunity for professional interaction with other teachers than do full time faculty; thus it is correspondingly harder for them to exchange ideas about teaching and to get a sense of shared institutional goals. Furthermore, in a course that requires students to complete sequential assignments, the great demands of practice and a fluctuating caseload can hamper the efforts of even the most conscientious practitioners to provide prompt feedback. Accessibility is also a perennial problem because adjunct professors are usually off-campus and busy. Finally, when these or other problems become serious enough that the law school chooses not to renew the contract of a particular individual, there is the real potential for awkwardness and ill will. Considering both the benefits and costs, most schools endorse cautious utilization of adjunct faculty.
Though the number of adjunct faculty members in legal education is increasing, adjuncts continue to exist on the periphery of most law school operations. They often teach at a time when few full-time faulty members are present at the school and are too often left to their own devices on matters such as course coverage, teaching techniques, and examination design. Adjuncts often find themselves ignored as part of the intellectual and social life of the school. Because of this tenuous relationship, adjuncts rarely have the opportunity to participate in the on-going law school dialog about pedagogical styles, testing methods, institutional goals, student expectations, and other topics pertinent to teaching and curriculum development. These are concerns voiced not only by adjunct faculty, but also by full-time law school faculty and administrators as well.
Among the reasons for law schools to pay greater attention to the integration of adjunct faculty into the intellectual and social community of the law school are the many recent developments in legal education. For instance, the range of topics taught in law school courses continues to broaden to include greater emphasis on skills, ethics, and interdisciplinary issues. At the same time, schools are beginning to develop specialized course progressions within the curriculum, such as in environmental law, public policy, litigation, intellectual property, and international law. Increased attention is being given to developing effective and innovative teaching alternatives to the traditional Socratic method. All of these developments may suggest the need for both greater institutional input into the teaching methods used and the subject matter presented by adjuncts, and greater focus on making adjunct teachers more effective and more substantial participants in the law school enterprise.
A. Providing Orientation and Mentoring for Adjunct Faculty
There are many ways to provide orientation for adjunct faculty and to facilitate their integration into the law school community. The law school may wish to have one occasion at the beginning of each year, if not each semester, at which adjunct faculty can meet one another and meet members of the full-time faculty and administration. The orientation might best be coordinated with teacher training sessions.
Although many schools leave communication with adjuncts to an appropriate dean, some schools provide mentors chosen from the full-time faculty to answer adjunct faculty's questions, discuss issues of teaching and scholarship, and perhaps even sit in on classes. In some programs, an adjunct is assigned a faculty member who acts as a liaison and informational resource for the adjunct and, in addition, oversees the adjunct's teaching. Some schools mandate observation of adjunct faculty by full-time faculty members; others provide for observation only when there is a report of poor classroom performance. At a minimum, adjunct faculty should be advised of the full-time faculty members who teach in related areas. Contact between full-time faculty and adjuncts to discuss course syllabi, teaching materials, and other curriculum-related issues gives the school opportunities for oversight, for collaboration, and for continuity among courses.
Law schools need to develop regular channels of communication so that adjunct faculty are informed of and invited to events such as special faculty luncheons or workshops, moot court arguments, and commencement. If the full-time faculty has a regular custom of lunching or taking coffee together, adjunct faculty might be encouraged to drop in when their schedules permit. The law school may wish to invite adjunct faculty to meetings with full-time faculty members (especially those faculty in the related subject area). If the faculty holds a retreat to discuss larger issues relating to the school, particularly issues related to teaching, consideration might be given to inviting adjunct faculty to participate. The same is true regarding one or more regularly scheduled faculty meetings.
While giving adjuncts the opportunity to become involved with law school activities is a good idea, sensitivity to the burdens on adjuncts also requires that the law school prioritize its expectations. An excellent classroom teacher is most important. Adjunct participation in moot court coaching, recruitment of students, and attendance at graduation should be secondary and clearly optional.
B. Promoting Effective Teaching by Adjunct Faculty
Law schools are in the habit of assuming that full-time faculty are likely to be effective instructors, though they may lack any systematic training in teaching. The same assumption typically is made about part-time teachers, perhaps even more so because of the fact that adjuncts have established successful careers in practice or on the bench.
1. Teaching Development Workshops
A teaching workshop for adjunct faculty members several weeks before the beginning of each academic year is one step toward promoting effective teaching. Trainers can provide insight, through discussion or simulated teaching exercises, about students, the teaching and learning processes, the varieties of effective teaching methods (e.g., Socratic, case method, problem method, drafting exercises, role playing, team-teaching, computer exercises, live-client representation), ways to develop productive teacher-student interactions, checklists for class preparation, suggestions for self evaluation, and advice on developing course syllabi, problems, hypotheticals, and examinations.
Such an introduction to law teaching may prove particularly useful for adjunct faculty members who have not been students in a law school classroom for many years. The best time for these sessions is about five weeks before school starts. At this point, adjuncts have had a chance to work with their full-time faculty mentors one-on-one; they will have their course outlines in progress; they will have selected course materials; and they will welcome suggestions and demonstrations about the actual classroom teaching. When possible, law schools might include experienced adjuncts in the planning and presentation of the training workshops. In addition to introductory workshops, some schools provide adjuncts with on-going teacher-training through free, annual continuing legal education programs.
2. Teaching Videos
In order to motivate adjuncts to incorporate different teaching styles into their courses and to utilize innovative teaching resources, schools may wish to develop videos demonstrating successful approaches and different teaching styles applied in various contexts. A wide range of teaching methods allows teachers to reach students who respond to various styles and allows teachers more opportunities to ensure that students understand the material in different contexts.
3. Teaching Materials
Because adjunct faculty may be more removed from debates over legal pedagogy, both in terms of time out of school and professional interest, they may be correspondingly less aware of recent innovations. Even for adjuncts whose teaching fits within the traditional mode, adjuncts' opportunities for the exchange of ideas about teaching strategies and styles are limited. Many schools provide their adjuncts with suggested readings about teaching. Some schools also provide teaching materials to adjuncts, as well as other resources that will help adjuncts strengthen their pedagogical expertise.  Adjuncts, though they may be successful practitioners, may need advice on successful class presentations, student motivation, or the implementation of problems and hypotheticals designed to allow students to act in various lawyering roles.
4. Teaching Outside the Classroom
The school should advise adjuncts that teaching contemplates interaction with students outside the classroom. Most schools encourage, if not require, adjunct faculty to set aside regularly scheduled times when students may call or visit them at work if office hours in the law school building itself are impractical.
1. Course Books
The typical adjunct lacks access to information about course books, and often is less familiar with book offerings and availability than a full-time faculty member. Some adjunct faculty members teach subjects for which there are no published casebooks. But in those courses for which published casebooks are available, the law school should facilitate the instructor's access to copies in order to make a book selection. The adjunct should be informed of resources, with ample time to take advantage of publisher procedures for review and selection. Perhaps the most efficient method of providing this information is through a designated administrator or a full-time faculty mentor who teaches in the same or a related area.
The adjunct instructor should be informed by an administrator or mentor of the typical volume of reading assignments and other class preparation expected of students in courses carrying the pertinent credit and instructional hours. Of course, there will be variations within each range--but at least an indication of the range would be useful. The adjunct should also be informed of the course description for his or her own course and for other courses that fall within the same teaching area, the pertinent prerequisites, and the course progression into the adjunct's course. That information will help to open lines of communication with others on the faculty and facilitate a more cohesive curriculum.
3. Orientation Manuals
The adjunct instructor should also be provided with an orientation manual that includes a checklist of matters to be covered on the first day of class: class lists and seating charts; the instructor's address and telephone number, and how students can best make contact; the syllabus and calendar; the instructor's attendance policy; and the instructor's expectations for reading and preparation, examinations, papers, and grading (including, for example, whether classroom participation will be taken into account, if the school so permits).
Ethical and professionalism issues may arise when practicing lawyers, judges, and other professionals teach students who are working or currently in the employment market. Schools might wish to call such potential problems to the attention of their adjunct faculty in advance. To what extent, for example, may a teacher subtly or overtly engage in recruitment of a particularly able student in the adjunct's class? Are there problems that flow from, say, a second-year summer associate taking a course the following academic year with an adjunct faculty member who is a partner at the firm where the student was employed (and the student is either one whom the firm is actively courting or one whose work the firm regarded as deficient)? Similarly sensitive issues can arise when a part-time faculty member is sent by his or her firm (or other employer) to the law school to interview and recruit. If a law school has any cautionary or prohibitive policies in this regard, it should make them known to adjunct faculty before she or he begins teaching.
Another area of potential concern relates to the confidentiality of matters on which the adjunct instructor or student may be working away from the law school. For example, a faculty member discussing such a matter might find that a student in the class has worked, or is working, on the other side of it. Conversely, a student might discuss or write about a matter emanating from work in a law firm or court chamber that creates concerns of confidentiality for the adjunct faculty member. A recent ALI-ABA Committee on Continuing Professional Education journal article that focuses on issues of confidentiality in continuing legal education programs highlights comparable issues that might occur in law school courses. As pointed out in the article, "The Model Rules and Model Code themselves offer little guidance, leaving unanswered the crucial question of when the use of personal experience [by a teaching lawyer] creates a conflict of interest or reveals confidential information." At a minimum, adjuncts and law students should be advised to take reasonable steps to prevent identification of a client and to prevent prejudice to a client if identified.
Accommodating different ethical assumptions that arise in non-legal fields may also be an area to address with adjuncts. Law school courses increasingly have an interdisciplinary focus and an interdisciplinary student enrollment, and the ethical concerns of different fields are not necessarily consistent. For instance, social workers have a code of professional responsibility quite different from that of lawyers. In some courses, it may be necessary to highlight some of the different ways that the different fields approach ethical issues.
A final matter worthy of exploration in school-inspired discussions among adjunct faculty is sensitivity to issues of race, ethnicity, gender, disability, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation--issues that may not have been openly addressed when the adjuncts attended law school. At the very least, jokes and comments that reflect stereotypes of, or disrespect for, any subgroups conscientiously must be avoided. The school should encourage all faculty members to manifest respect and a welcoming environment for all subgroups within the student body in informal conversations, in classroom discourse, and in the formulation of hypothetical questions and examinations. Law schools might consider providing adjuncts (and, indeed, full-time faculty) with recent studies, such as the reports of the ABA Commission on Women in the Profession and the ABA Commission on Opportunities for Minorities in the Profession.
The Americans with Disabilities Act and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 require that courses, programs and facilities be accessible to students with disabilities. This sometimes requires use of auxiliary aids, such as sign language interpreters. Adjuncts should be advised to make materials available to students in a way that allows them to learn on an equal basis with other students.
Adjuncts should be advised about law school or university policies relating to harassment, dating, and student grievances. In regard to all of the above matters, law schools should designate a person with whom adjuncts can discuss these issues.
E. Evaluating and Rewarding Adjunct Faculty
As mentioned earlier, some schools provide evaluations for adjuncts through designated mentors. Others undertake a formal evaluation process, e.g., a designated full-time faculty member or committee of such members visits classes, reviews course materials, and perhaps interviews students. Some also encourage part-time as well as full-time faculty to videotape a class and discuss it with another member of the faculty. Informal mid-semester evaluations by students may be useful to adjunct faculty or new full-time faculty to provide feedback on student receptivity and comprehension.
Most law schools distribute teaching-evaluation questionnaires to students at the end of their courses, and that should be done for adjunct faculty no less than for full-time faculty. The questionnaire results should be reviewed by a designated person on the academic staff or full-time faculty, and that person should communicate evaluative comments to the adjunct faculty member. This is particularly important not only in instances in which constructive criticism is warranted, but also when the comments are favorable.
Adjuncts should be recognized for their contributions to the law school and legal education. Many adjuncts are motivated to serve as adjunct faculty by a desire to give back to their institution and the professional community. In doing so, they set a positive professional example for our students. Especially because the financial remuneration is so meager, the gratitude of the faculty and administration should be loud and clear, and repeated often. "Stroking" by the Dean and faculty members is essential.
Just as outstanding teaching is routinely recognized for full-time faculty by some sort of prize or recognition at public events at the school, the same might be done for adjunct faculty who, after all, are inspired by recognition and commendation just as much as full-time faculty. At least one school awards an annual teaching prize for adjunct instructors based on exceptional service in teaching, curriculum development, student counseling, and involvement in the school's extra-curricular activities.
Adjunct faculty should be informed of the names, roles, and telephone numbers of the principal offices and persons with whom they are likely to interact before and during their teaching term. These typically include the Associate Dean, the registrar or records office, the technical support and word-processing services, the audiovisual services, the library, the photocopying center, the bookstore, the payroll office, and the security desk.
Particularly important areas of need for adjuncts include communication and computer-related issues, library resources, and the preparation and duplication of class materials. Adjunct faculty need to have detailed information about these matters, or at least know the identity of persons who can readily provide these services. The same has become true for access to audiovisual materials and technical assistance as the utilization of videotaped programs and classroom videotaping of student performances has become more commonplace in legal education.
Although it is important to have all of the above information provided in writing for adjunct faculty, this material may best be presented in a meeting at the beginning of the academic year at which the adjuncts are introduced to those key persons in the administration and staff who can better explain their functions and answer questions. Some schools assign a particular individual to handle adjunct questions that arise during the semester about administrative logistics, and another (or the same) person to handle questions about course content, pedagogical issues, examinations, and the like.
B. Institutional Practices and Procedures
The law school should provide the adjunct, via an adjunct manual or otherwise, with basic information about class meeting times, course enrollment, room assignments, institutional attendance and absence policies, course grading expectations (e.g., required or typical grade curves), and deadlines for the submission of course materials, examinations, and course grades. Student picture books should be made available to the part-time instructor. The school should also provide the adjunct with copies of the student and faculty handbooks, including a summary of rules of conduct (honor codes), and procedures for handling breaches of conduct codes. If the law school has a set of materials on administrative matters that it regularly distributes to its full-time faculty, it may consider providing a scaled down version to adjunct faculty. Time considerations for adjuncts may make it more efficient to include only the material of special pertinence to adjuncts.
If the school or the students have come to expect the distribution of a syllabus at or near the beginning of a course, that should be communicated to the instructor. One law school with a substantial complement of adjunct faculty requires that, "A detailed, 14-week syllabus, as well as a course information sheet, should be distributed to students and sent to the Records Office at the beginning of the semester. The syllabus should discuss reading assignments, methods of evaluation, class participation requirements, assignments due during the semester, and specific requirements for research papers (if applicable)." The school may present samples of particularly well-designed syllabi so that the work of prior adjuncts and full-time faculty members can provide ideas for others who follow.
Another topic of great importance for adjunct faculty, who are often busy practitioners or judges without total calendar control, is the cancellation of classes. Cancellation policies and procedures regarding rescheduling should be communicated directly to adjunct faculty or through the orientation manual. The law school should clarify the circumstances under which cancellations are appropriate, describe any requirements for conducting make-up classes, and identify the persons at the school to notify in such eventualities.
If the adjunct instructor will need a university identification card, parking pass, or keys to the law school building, offices, or classrooms, such information should be provided to the adjunct well in advance of the teaching term. It is also useful to provide information regarding access to the faculty lounge, the university's athletic facilities, and the like.
An orientation manual and program for adjuncts is highly recommended. Because the details of each manual will be specific to the needs and goals of the individual law schools, we provide an outline below of topics typically covered in adjunct manuals. Orientation programs might follow this agenda, as well, and include presentations on issues described elsewhere in this manual.
1. Administrative Matters
Building hours, access, and identification
Faculty and staff office hours and phone lists
Library hours, resources, and policies
Class assignment notices
Bookstore hours and policies
Payroll and compensation criteria
Access to school amenities, athletic complex, food services
Emergency closing procedures
Student and faculty handbooks
2. Support Services
Availability of support services: word processing, photocopying, audio-visual, shipping and receiving
Preparation and distribution of course materials, syllabi, and examinations
Communications and mail access, especially for adjuncts who may be teaching nights, after regular services are closed
Assignment of offices and administrative assistants
Internet, LEXIS/NEXIS, and Westlaw access
Interlibrary loan and other faculty library resources
Information on university and school life, faculty functions, and interest groups
4. Course Development and Curriculum Requirements
Coursebook availability and selection suggestions
Availability of model syllabi and prior exams
Program or school goals relevant to classes or clinical programs
Coordination of course material between adjuncts and full-time faculty working in the area of expertise
Mentoring programs or faculty contacts for feedback and advice
Other curricula resources including suggestions on class structure in different areas and student participation
Clinical administration and placement information
Bar course curricula requirements
Course content, syllabus requirements, appropriate reading loads, and coordination with school curricula
Seating charts, room assignments, class lists, and student picture books
Attendance and absence policies
Policies on class cancellations and rescheduling
Out-of-class availability for student questions, designated "office hours"
Accommodations for disabled students
Accommodations for religious observances
Requirements for class time and breaks
Harassment and dating policies
Restrictions on eating and smoking
Policies for guest lecturers
6. Examination of Students and Grading Policies
Examination procedures and suggested formats
Grade distributions, grading policies and deadlines
Other student evaluation criteria, discretionary grading
Honor Code, plagiarism, requests for grade review
Writing policies and requirements
Eligibility requirements for participation in clinics and competitions
Use of student evaluations
Class attendance and evaluation by full-time faculty
Other faculty performance evaluation procedures
There are a myriad of ways that judges, practicing lawyers, and other professionals can become involved in a law school's educational program, apart from teaching courses.
Adjuncts can be invited to assist a full-time faculty member in presenting individual class sessions. To facilitate this, law schools or individual faculty must take the initiative to identify and compile lists of available and interested persons in particular fields. State and local bar association sections and committees are useful sources of suggestions.
B. Participating in Faculty Seminars
Adjuncts can be invited to collaborate in faculty seminars along with full-time faculty. Current developments in the courts and in the profession, recent books or motion pictures about the law, and standard legal transactions are possible topics for presentation.
C. Serving as a Resource on Practice and Professional Responsibility
Adjuncts can assist the faculty in exploring issues related to practice and professional responsibility. This can be done through talks to students--either special lectures or more informally through invitations to participate in particular courses. Adjuncts can also assist full-time faculty in creating professional responsibility problems for incorporation in teaching materials.
Adjuncts can serve as mentors for students through programs created by the law school administration or by student organizations. Some schools have had particular success in placing minority and women lawyers and judges in mentoring relationships with minority and women students. Attorneys already teaching as adjunct faculty members might be particularly well suited for this purpose. They could meet with interested students to talk about the practice of law, law firms, and the like; they might even play a more formal role as an advisor to a limited number of students at those schools that have such an advisory structure. Practicing lawyers who are active in bar association service and committees could be matched by the law school with students who are interested in observing such activities as an introduction to law reform and public service.
E. Assisting With Curricular Development
Adjuncts can assist in proposing and developing courses and teaching materials. Lawyers engaged in counseling and transactional planning or international transactions, for example, are well-positioned to identify the issues that are likely to be of importance in the immediate and long-term future.
The second edition of this Manual marks the conclusion of the work of the ABA Coordinating Committee and the beginning of the work of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Skills Training Committee on this project. The Manual is by no means a perfect blueprint for law schools and adjuncts. As suggested in the Introduction, the purposes of the Manual are twofold--to highlight steps that law schools can take that will enhance the integration of adjunct faculty into the law school teaching enterprise, and to generate discussion regarding orientation, guidance, monitoring, evaluation, and other issues relating to adjunct faculty. Indeed, this process is viewed by all as a common endeavor: making partners of the ABA, law schools, and adjuncts in the joint venture of enriching legal education.
The second edition of the Manual, like the first edition, collects ideas from a host of contributors. You are invited and urged to broaden the group of contributors to the next edition with your comments and criticism. In addition, you are urged to send the Skills Training Committee materials or manuals you have used successfully at your law school.
[*] This report represents the work product of the 1996-97 ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Skills Training Committee and the 1996-97 ABA Coordinating Committee on Legal Education. The views expressed herein have not been approved by the House of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the ABA nor has such approval been sought. Accordingly, these views should not be construed as representing the policy of the ABA. The report is published here to provide easy distribution to full-time law faculty and adjuncts. Reprinted with permission. Copyright © 1997 American Bar Association.
[**] Professor of Law and Director of Clinical Education, Washington University. B.A., Webster College, 1970; J.D., St. Louis University, 1976; LL.M., University of California, Berkeley, 1985. Professor Tokarz served as the chair of the 1996-97 ABA Skills Training Committee and the principal editor for this report. In addition to Professor Tokarz, the members of the committee were Cory M. Amron, Esq., Professor J. Martin Burke, Dean Neil H. Cogan, Professor Isabelle R. Gunning, Dean Joseph D. Harbaugh, Professor Randy A. Hertz, Lillian O. Johnson, Esq., and Professor Homer C. La Rue.
[1.] Robert Gorman, Kenneth W. Gemmill Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania, generously served as the principal editor of the first edition of this report, prepared by the Subcommittee on Adjunct Faculty of the 1992-93 ABA Coordinating Committee on Legal Education.
[2.] Standard 403(c), as amended in August 1996, now states as follows: "A law school should include experienced lawyers and judges as teaching resources, on a full-time or part-time basis, to enrich its educational program."
[3.] Standard 403(c) quite naturally focuses primarily on lawyers and judges as adjuncts because they are the most common categories of persons asked to teach at a law school. Increasingly, however, law schools and particularly clinical programs have taken a more interdisciplinary approach to law and law teaching. Hence, law school adjuncts may also come from professions other than law. Social work and medicine, for example, are two categories of other professionals that might be asked to teach at a law school.
[4.] Interpretation 403-1 states: "Appropriate use of practicing lawyers and judges as part-time faculty requires that a law school provide them with orientation, guidance, monitoring, and evaluation."
[5.] The committees would like to thank the following law school faculty and staff for contributing adjunct materials and orientation materials that served as models for the development of this Manual: American University Washington College of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law, Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Fordham University School of Law, George Washington University Law School, Howard University School of Law Clinical Law Center, University of Idaho College of Law Legal Aid Clinic, John Marshall Law School, New England School of Law, New York Law School, University of Pittsburgh School of Law, University of Richmond School of Law, and Washington University School of Law.
[6.] One of the most helpful (as well as entertaining) articles on this topic is a recent piece by Andrew Popper, former Associate Dean, American University Washington College of Law. See Andrew F. Popper, The Uneasy Integration of Adjunct Teachers into American Legal Education, 47 J. OF LEGAL EDUC. 83 (1997).
[7.] This Manual is focused primarily on classroom adjuncts, although many of the suggestions also are relevant to adjuncts who teach in clinical courses. However, special attention must be paid to the ABA's accreditation standards relating to clinical programs and clinical faculty, in particular Standards 305 and 405.
[8.] Daniel Keating, Associate Dean, Washington University School of Law, provided many useful insights about the benefits and costs of adjunct faculty, as well as insights about orientation and mentoring issues. See Daniel Keating, A Comprehensive Approach to Orientation and Mentoring for New Faculty, 46 J. OF LEGAL EDUC. 59 (1996) (focusing on full-time faculty).
[9.] The materials for the University of Baltimore School of Law adjunct orientation program, for example, include a suggested reading list for teachers, sample syllabi, sample examinations, a copy of the student course evaluation form, and excerpts on structuring classes and teaching techniques from MARLENE LEBRUN AND RICHARD JOHNSTONE, THE QUIET REVOLUTION (1994).
[10.] See, e.g., THE ADJUNCT FACULTY HANDBOOK (1996); Susan J. Becker, Advice for the New Law Professor: A View from the Trenches, 42 J. LEGAL EDUC. 432 (1992); Paula Franzese & C.M.A. McCauliff, The Community of Law Teachers and Scholars Expands: Guideposts for New Faculty, 22 SETON HALL L. REV. 1375 (1992); William L. Prosser, Lighthouse No Good, 1 J. LEGAL EDUC. 257 (1948); Kent D. Syverud, Taking Students Seriously: A Guide for New Law Teachers, 43 J. LEGAL EDUC. 247 (1993); Douglas J. Whaley, Teaching Law: Advice for the New Professor, 43 OHIO ST. L.J. 125 (1982).
[11.] See, e.g., the ABA Coordinating Committee on Legal Education, Team-Teaching of Substantive Law and Practice Skills in Substantive Law Contexts (1996), giving suggestions and examples of how to incorporate exercises emphasizing practical skills into core courses taught by full-time faculty and practicing lawyers.
[12.] The Adjunct Faculty Handbook of the New England School of Law, for example, in addition to extensive coverage of issues such as choosing course materials, preparing a syllabus, and developing exams, contains an informative discussion of pedagogical techniques and their application in different subjects.
[13.] See Eric L. Muller, A New Law Teacher's Guide to Choosing a Casebook, 45 J. LEGAL EDU. 557 (1995).
[14.] See Lee D. Hwang, The Ethical Obligations of a Teaching Lawyer, 38 CLE J. & REG. 5, 5-6 (Sept. 1992).
[16.] See infra note 18 and accompanying text.
[17.] See, e.g., Elusive Equality: The Experiences of Women in Legal Education, ABA Commission on Women in the Profession (1995); The Burdens of Both, the Privileges of Neither, ABA Multicultural Women Attorneys Network (1994).
[18.] See the discussion on this topic in the Georgetown University Law Center Handbook for Adjunct Faculty 18 (1997-98).
[19.] John D. Feerick, Dean, Fordham University School of Law, reports that a faculty committee on adjuncts at Fordham has developed an adjunct faculty evaluation form to be used by full-time faculty reviewers.
[20.] The George Washington University Law School Adjunct Faculty Handbook 3 (1997).