Volume 25, Issue 1.  TEACHING AND TECHNOLOGY:TEACHING ADR AND THE
FUTURE OF DISPUTE SYSTEM DESIGN

A pdf of the Table of Contents is available here: (25-1 TOC).

Abstracts of the articles appear below:

Pedagogy, Progress and Portfolios: Professor Deborah Merritt talks about the possibility of portfolios as a method to innovate law school education, especially in dispute resolution courses. The article defines portfolios and how portfolios can affect curriculum in law schools. Professor Merritt discusses how students can feel engaged in their legal education and recognize the value of law school through active portfolio use. Finally, Professor Merritt examines how portfolios can enhance alternative dispute resolution teaching as they encourage innovative methods to educate students about ADR processes and practices.

Islands, Vitamins, Salt, Germs: Professor Michael Moffitt uses various metrics—from the AALS directory of law professors to the US News & World Report Law School Rankings—to measure dispute resolution teaching in law schools. Professor Moffitt attempts to answer how many, how often, where dispute resolution courses are, and what lessons can be teased from this survey of dispute resolution in law schools. Sifting through his data, Professor Moffitt hypothesizes four models for how law schools offer dispute resolution teaching and training: the titular Islands, Vitamins, Salt, and Germs. Professor Moffitt describes his data in hopes that that it sheds light on the relationship that dispute resolution teaching has to curricular decisions and the place that dispute resolution holds in law schools.

The Classroom Can Be All Fun & Games: Professor Andrea Schneider and Kathleen Goodrich discuss a videogame, Peacemaker, and its role in helping teach dispute resolution concepts. The Peacemaker game simulates the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, helping students understand international conflict, issues of international interdependency, and dispute resolution theories. Professor Schneider and Ms. Goodrich describe their use of the Peacemaker game in the classroom and its role in dispute resolution teaching. Additionally, the authors trace the history of these “serious” games, and consider the possibilities of serious games to assist in the teaching and application of principles in dispute resolution.

Artificial Intelligence: Robots, Avatars, and the Demise of the Human Mediator: Professor David Larson explores the technological advances in artificial intelligence devices. In charting the growth and developing ability of humanoid robots, avatars, and other relational agents in understanding and interacting successfully with humans. Professor Larson also considers the possibilities for artificial intelligence assistance in dispute resolution. The author considers the various situations in which relational agents would interact with disputants, and the needs of disputants in order for relational agents to effectively assist in dispute resolution. Professor Larson also considers how changing technology affects the future of dispute resolution practice and teaching.

The Lawyer’s Mind: Why A Twenty-First Century Legal Practice Will Not Thrive Using Nineteenth Century Thinking (With Thanks to George Llakoff): Professor Phyllis Bernard considers the changing nature of legal practice and that lawyers are now requested to not only expertly know their discipline of the law, but also exhibit wisdom in their practice. The wisdom, according to Professor Bernard, entails both emotional intelligence and an understanding of the client’s situation as a web of interconnected concerns that touches the psychological, social, and social issues of the individual. Professor Bernard forwards the idea that lawyers who learn and employ dispute resolution skills in their everyday practice can raise their emotional intelligence. Finally, Professor Bernard uses a recent example in which lawyers’ understanding of emotional intelligence lacked, illustrating that lawyers who are trained in dispute resolution skills could have negotiated the underlying cultural and psychological interests to defuse a legal problem that escalated under “Nineteenth Century Thinking.”

Online Influence Space(s) and Digital Influence Waves: In Honor of Charly: Professor Benjamin Davis discusses three situations that illustrate both how new online interactions affect individuals, as well as how individuals influence others in these online spaces. Professor Davis discusses how the online space of an email listserv changed the drafting process for a resolution to the American Society of International Law, allowing comments and suggestions from both members and non-members. Second, Professor Davis examines a blog, discussing how its online structure affects the individual, power and influence within the blog, and how ideas proliferate across the online blog space. Finally, Professor Davis considers the Obama Open Government Initiative, noting that this online space affects individuals’ access to power and how open, online idea spaces might change governmental processes. Professor Davis also considers how these online spaces affect dispute resolution processes.

The Potential Contribution of ADR to an Integrated Curriculum: Preparing Law Students for Real World Lawyering: Professors John Lande and Jean Sternlight discuss the current format of law school curriculum, noting the advent of dispute resolution as an important legal discipline rocked the traditional model of law school teaching and course offerings. In their discussion, the Professors note specific deficiencies and possible failings of the traditional law school model. The Professors then turn to the barriers preventing experimentation and the possible implementation of new curricular models in law schools. Finally, the Professors discuss how the inclusion of ADR principles to law school curriculum, both in increasing the amount of law school offerings of ADR material, as well as closing the gap between legal practice and lawyering in law schools.