TaxProf Blog

Editor: Paul L. Caron
Pepperdine University School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Monday, January 7, 2013

Rodriguez: Faculty Must Work Harder

Over the holidays, Northwestern Dean Dan Rodriguez sparked a spirited debate with his post, Workload:

As reformists and irritants likewise insist, we are going to increase our expectations of full-time faculty members in order to realize cost savings and take our foots off the tuition pedal. ... So how ought we to think about these great(er) expectations?

(1) Teaching regularly and well and with sufficient accomodation to institutional needs, as these needs evolve in this new and difficult era.  Deans, including this one, will be reticent to enter into permanent teaching reduction agreements.  Scheduling will need to follow the imperative of student learning and sensible organizational management, not principally the convenience of full-time faculty members.  Faculty leaves, whatever the reason and whatever past practice, should be discretionary and timed around the needs of the school and its learning environment.  And teaching must be excellent -- sophisticated in content, coherent in expression, up-to-date, and connected increasingly to the essential project of making our students into first-rate young lawyers;

(2) All hands on deck.  Faculty members are the professional portals to the students' legal careers.  The work of training rests in their hands.  But, to an increasing extent now, so, too, does counseling and placement.  Developing opportunities for students to pursue remunerative, valuable careers should be part of the work of a faculty member.  This will range from active career counseling, writing effective recommendations for clerkships and, where appropriate, law firm employment, and helping students with their employment search in imaginative, tangible, and reliable ways.  This work is too important to leave solely to overworked career service offices and deans;

(3) Insofar as scholarship forms an important part of the modern faculty portfolio, expectations of excellent, impactful scholarship should be high -- indeed, in this difficult environment, especially high.  Law profs have an exceptionally enviable gig.  Let's just suppose that faculty members need to demonstrate their suitability for this gig on an annual basis, and with unimpeachable evidence that they are doing their scholarly work at a level that befits this great job.

In short, faculty workloads will grow.  They ought to grow.  The central question, to me, is how they ought to grow in a way that serves the professional objectives of our students, while also preserving what is tremendously valuable in the contributions of the law professiorate in the contemporary legal academy.

Check out the many comments from Stephen Bainbridge, Matt Bodie, Orin Kerr, Brian Tamanaha, and others, Dan's responses, and Jeff Lipshaw's follow-up post.  I especially liked Brian's comment:

"In short, faculty workloads will grow. They ought to grow."

This way of putting it tends to obscure the underlying difficulty. Some faculty members already carry a very heavy workload (working nights and weekends). Not much more can be squeezed out of them (although what they spend their time on can be changed). On the other hand, some faculty members do little beyond teach their classes and serve on a committee or two, and others work at a productive but comfortable pace. Faculties differ in the proportion of people in these respective categories.

Getting more out of the latter two groups is difficult because deans have little power to sanction slackers and limited resources to create incentives for working harder. A dean can increase faculty productivity by assigning an extra class to those who should be (or could be) doing more, but deans are reluctant to do this because it generates resentment.

The key is to raise up the internal culture of expectations within the faculty in a way that gets everyone to embrace the duty to give it their all. Any suggestions on how to do that?

See also today's earlier post, The Least Stressful Job in America: Professor.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/01/rodriguez-.html

Legal Education | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef017c3560c5d3970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Rodriguez: Faculty Must Work Harder:

Comments

If responsibility for career counseling and placement is going to shift from deans and administrators to faculty members, will pay also be shifting from deans and career service personnel to faculty?

Posted by: Anon | Jan 7, 2013 1:40:34 PM

"because it generates resentment."

Grow a pair.

You are already facing murderous resentment from legions of defrauded alumni.

And as for that "nights and weekends" bullsh*t - there is little to say.

The only way "nights and weekends" is true for even a tiny fraction of the professoriat is because they are pouring hours and hours and hours into their own privately motivated ideological "scholarship".

I would very, very, very much like to see a list of law schools where the average *teaching* load is in excess of six "classroom hours" (50 minute "hours") per *week* - for two thirds of the year.

Teaching loads are an obscene joke at law schools.

Triply so given the pay.

Go try and get the mythic Biglaw partnerships that you are forever preening about forgoing.

Go - you won't be missed.

Primarily...because you'll never leave!

Because in your rotted, fraudulent souls, you know that your preening is utterly, utterly empty.

And as contemptuous as your professional ethics.

Dear Deans - we are long, long past falling for your institutionalized, encrusted bullsh*t.

And we aren't afraid to publicize the real facts to the world.

It is a measure of the utter corruption of legal academia that tepid tea like this is considered radical.

Your armies of embittered alumni have *just begun* to show you what "radical" really is.

Posted by: cas127 | Jan 7, 2013 9:17:25 PM

So the upshot is that the "crisis" in legal education is an excuse for administrators, who largely created the problem, to press hard on faculty who didn't, and for middle-tier scholars (see above) to publish "scholarship" discussing the crisis rather than anything of lasting worth. Someone with authority has to have the courage to say this is all a lot of nonsense. People who don't believe in what they are doing--who don't believe that law and legal scholarship have a value beyond the current market--would do us all a favor if they'd leave.

Posted by: michael livingston | Jan 9, 2013 2:13:49 AM